The development and introduction of a national e-learning programme to support the dissemination of NEWS2.

Early detection, timeliness and competence of clinical response are a triad of determinants of clinical outcome in people with acute illness. In 2012, the Royal College of Physicians published the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) with the aim of standardising the response to, assessment of and monitoring of acutely ill patients. This was subsequently updated in December 2017 to become NEWS2. Alongside the development of NEWS/NEWS2, it was clear that a supportive educational package was going to be essential for dissemination, learning and national adoption of NEWS/NEWS2 across all healthcare settings. Another driver for the early development of an e-learning package to accompany the launch of NEWS in 2012 was the opportunity that it provided not only to standardise the early warning system across the NHS but also to use that standardised process to facilitate better and more consistent education and training across the entire healthcare system; building on the concept of NEWS providing a common language.

An evaluation of UK foundation trainee doctors' learning behaviours in a technology-enhanced learning environment.

BACKGROUND: Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL) can be used to educate Foundation Programme trainee (F1 and F2) doctors. Despite the advantages of TEL, learning behaviours may be exhibited that are not desired by system developers or educators. The aim of this evaluation was to investigate how learner behaviours (e.g. time spent on task) were affected by temporal (e.g. time of year), module (e.g. word count), and individual (e.g. knowledge) factors for 16 mandatory TEL modules related to prescribing and therapeutics. METHODS: Data were extracted from the SCRIPT e-Learning platform for first year Foundation trainee (F1) doctors in the Health Education England's West Midland region from 1(st) August 2013 to 5(th) August 2014. Generalised Estimating Equation models were used to examine the relationship between time taken to complete modules, date modules were completed, pre- and post-test scores, and module factors. RESULTS: Over the time period examined, 688 F1 doctors interacted with the 16 compulsory modules 10,255 times. The geometric mean time taken to complete a module was 28.9 min (95% Confidence Interval: 28.4-29.5) and 1,075 (10.5%) modules were completed in less than 10 min. In February and June (prior to F1 progression reviews) peaks occurred in the number of modules completed and troughs in the time taken. Most modules were completed, and the greatest amount of time was spent on the learning on a Sunday. More time was taken by those doctors with greater pre-test scores and those with larger improvements in test scores. CONCLUSIONS: Foundation trainees are exhibiting unintended learning behaviours in this TEL environment, which may be attributed to several factors. These findings can help guide future developments of this TEL programme and the integration of other TEL programmes into curricula by raising awareness of potential behavioural issues that may arise.

Improving assessment of paediatric acute breathing difficulties in medical education: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIM: Impact assessment of an adjunct to standard teaching on knowledge gain and self-assessed confidence for students undertaking their paediatric attachment and evaluation of an acute breathing difficulties (ABDs) learning package. METHODS: Pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial involving 248 UK medical undergraduates within six paediatric clinical rotations. Intervention groups received an online ABD learning package consisting of symptom-based decision-making pathways underpinned by a ratified ABD evidence-based guideline. Control groups received an online dummy package. Outcome measures were a pre- and post-intervention multiple choice question assessment and confidence questionnaire utilising 5-point Likert scales. RESULTS: Significant knowledge gain in the intervention group (mean 6.84, 95% CI 5.56-8.12) versus no such difference in the control group, significant improvement in self-assessed confidence in intervention group versus no such difference in control group and significant confidence differences in ABD-specific statements were noted. In the satisfaction questionnaire, the learning content was noted to be new to only 16% participants. CONCLUSION: Supplementation of standard teaching with an interactive delivery method resulted in cognitive gain and self-assessed confidence improvement in interaction with children with ABDs. This indicates that a well-designed tool can help prepare students for direct interaction with sick children as a junior clinician. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN27499282.