Capturing, the experiences of undergraduate student nurses undertaking a pre-registration nursing degree course using an adapted experience based co-design approach.

BACKGROUND: The quality of student experience in higher education plays an increasingly important role in attracting and retaining pre-registration nurses. Identifying and understanding the students' experiences of their course is a necessary step in the move towards improving the student experience. Experience Based Co-design (EBCD) is successfully established as an effective process for improving patient experience in a health care setting. This study presents the use of EBCD outside of healthcare, specifically in a higher education setting. OBJECTIVES: To capture, explore and understand the experiences of students' undertaking a pre-registration (adult) nursing course, and co-design potential improvements for future experiences through the application of an EBCD approach. METHODS: An adapted EBCD approach was utilised for gaining insight into what shapes students' experience of the nursing course and to collaboratively produce priority recommendations for course improvement. Semi-structured interviews, emotional touchpoint mapping and co-design events were conducted with undergraduate nursing students (n = 22) and staff stakeholders in a pre-registration (adult) nursing course (n = 19). Findings were analysed using the 'Six phases of thematic analysis' (Braun & Clarke, 2006). RESULTS: Students had varied experiences on the nursing course, both positive and negative, particularly with student support. Three priority recommendations for course improvement were identified from the findings including: facilitating and supporting student development of independent study skills, enhancing student support in the clinical practice placement environment and clarifying and enhancing the role of the academic advisor. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study highlight areas for improvement on a pre-registration nursing course that could impact future students' experience. Furthermore, this study appears to be the first documented as using EBCD in a higher education setting with the focus on students, that enabled students and staff stakeholders in the nursing course to co-design priority recommendations for course improvement.

Collaborative healthcare education programmes for continuing professional education in low and middle-income countries: A Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) systematic review. BEME Guide No. 65.

BACKGROUND: Large discrepancies exist between standards of healthcare provision in high-income (HICs) and low and middle-income countries (LMICs). The root cause is often financial, resulting in poor infrastructure and under-resourced education and healthcare systems. Continuing professional education (CPE) programmes improve staff knowledge, skills, retention, and practice, but remain costly and rare in low-resource settings. One potential solution involves healthcare education collaborations between institutions in HICs and LMICs to provide culturally appropriate CPE in LMICs. To be effective, educational partnerships must address the challenges arising from differences in cultural norms, language, available technology and organisational structures within collaborating countries. METHODS: Seven databases and other sources were systematically searched on 7 July 2020 for relevant studies. Citations, abstracts, and studies were screened and consensus was reached on which to include within the review. 54 studies were assessed regarding the type of educational programme involved, the nature of HIC/LMIC collaboration and quality of the study design. RESULTS: Studies varied greatly regarding the types and numbers of healthcare professionals involved, pedagogical and delivery methods, and the ways in which collaboration was undertaken. Barriers and enablers of collaboration were identified and discussed. The key findings were: 1. The methodological quality of reporting in the studies was generally poor. 2. The way in which HIC/LMIC healthcare education collaboration is undertaken varies according to many factors, including what is to be delivered, the learner group, the context, and the resources available. 3. Western bias was a major barrier. 4. The key to developing successful collaborations was the quality, nature, and duration of the relationships between those involved. CONCLUSION: This review provides insights into factors that underpin successful HIC/LMIC healthcare CPE collaborations and outlines inequities and quality issues in reporting.

Non-technical skills assessments in undergraduate medical education: A focused BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 54.

Consensus on how to assess non-technical skills is lacking. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the evidence regarding non-technical skills assessments in undergraduate medical education, to describe the tools used, learning outcomes and the validity, reliability and psychometrics of the instruments. A standardized search of online databases was conducted and consensus reached on included studies. Data extraction, quality assessment, and content analysis were conducted per Best Evidence in Medical Education guidelines. Nine papers met the inclusion criteria. Assessment methods broadly fell into three categories: simulated clinical scenarios, objective structured clinical examinations, and questionnaires or written assessments. Tools to assess non-technical skills were often developed locally, without reference to conceptual frameworks. Consequently, the tools were rarely validated, limiting dissemination and replication. There were clear themes in content and broad categories in methods of assessments employed. The quality of this evidence was poor due to lack of theoretical underpinning, with most assessments not part of normal process, but rather produced as a specific outcome measure for a teaching-based study. While the current literature forms a good starting position for educators developing materials, there is a need for future work to address these weaknesses as such tools are required across health education.

Twelve tips for undertaking a focused systematic review in medical education.

The exponential growth of the systematic review methodology within health has been mirrored within medical education, allowing large numbers of publications on a topic to be synthesized to guide researchers and teachers. The robust, transparent and reproducible search methodologies employed offer scholarly rigor. The scope and scale of many reviews in education have only been matched by the size of the commitment needed to complete them and occasional lack of utility of reports. As such, we have noticed a growth in reviews across journals in the field that have questions that are more focused in scope. The authors propose 12 tips for performing a focused review in the right settings for the right reasons and discuss why such "focused reviews" may be more beneficial in those circumstances. Focused reviews allow researchers to formulate answers to specific local issues that have explicit utility of findings. Such reviews are equipped to identify what works for specific groups in specific circumstances and even question how and why this may occur. An additional impact of a focused approach can be a rapid turnaround. This article explains the purpose and benefits of focused review and provides guidance on how to produce them.

12 tips for developing inter-professional education (IPE) in healthcare.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. As healthcare increases in complexity there is growing awareness that interprofessional teamwork underpins safe and effective care delivery. However, in order to collaborate in interprofessional teams, health professionals must also train in them. Despite increasing interest in IPE amongst healthcare educators, and positive comments from students, barriers to its implementation remain. The authors of this article come from different healthcare professions and have overcome the challenges of developing IPE to devise several successful activities. This article outlines the educational benefits of IPE and provides guidance for surmounting obstacles to its implementation, supported by examples from our own experience.

Risk reduction and sudden infant death syndrome.

This article explores the concepts of 'risk' and 'risk reduction' in relation to sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and the implications for practice. Risk reduction is a term utilised in public health, which is usually linked to evidence-based outcomes. The Back to Sleep campaign is a high profile initiative which seeks to raise awareness of risk factors relating to SIDS and is largely credited with contributing to a significant reduction in the incidence of SIDS in the UK. Misunderstandings may occur between the terms 'risk reduction' and 'prevention' of health conditions and parents may feel that one equates to the other. There are also tensions which are inherent in defining risk in the context of SIDS. Certain measures may become 'shorthand' for a range of interventions and contributing factors. The practice of offering additional monitoring as support may reinforce a (mis)understanding about risk reduction and SIDS. There are implications for practice regarding how health professionals approach this issue, explain the guidelines and offer support.A clearer understanding of risk reduction would potentially enable bereaved parents to articulate their experiences without becoming too self critical in questioning their own consistent adherence to the accepted guidelines.