Using evaluation to enhance educational support for dental teams in the UK.

Each United Kingdom regional postgraduate deanery offers courses and educational support for the NHS (National Health Service) primary care dental team, primarily through networks of tutors (dental educators). After reporting literature on effective continuing education and the role of evaluation, this article provides an analysis of five educational evaluations (2005-08), identifying key messages and distilling ways to enhance educational support for the UK dental team. These evaluations adopted case study design and principally employed interviews (n=51) and questionnaires (n=221). The studies' key messages and recommendations are as follows: clarify dental educator roles; provide strategic management and educational support for educators; ensure continuing education is matched to the learning needs of dental teams and specific groups; and use practice (office) visits to support practice (team) development plans. Evaluation enables initiatives to be evidence-informed, focus effort where most needed, argue for continued funding, and give voice to stakeholders. However, there is added value in a collective consideration of evaluation findings from related studies. Doing this has identified ways to enhance the strategic development of educational support for the UK dental team and is applicable in a wider context both nationally and internationally.

How ratings vary by staff group in multi-source feedback assessment of junior doctors.

CONTEXT: UK doctors-in-training undergo assessments of their professional behaviours. From an analysis of multi-source feedback (MSF) data, we report how ratings of junior doctors (Foundation Programme [FP] doctors and senior house officers [SHOs]) differed by staff group. METHODS: The MSF data were collected in 2003 and 2005 in hospitals in the West Midlands. Using a single-sided Team Assessment of Behaviour form, 1928 assessors evaluated 226 FP doctors and SHOs in four domains: professional relationship with patients; communication; team-working, and accessibility. The distribution of 'concerns' across the professional groups was explored using a random effects logistic regression model. RESULTS: On average, each trainee received nine assessment forms from a range of staff, most commonly nurses. Although concerns were identified for the minority, ratings varied by staff group. Peers (other FP doctors or SHOs) and administrators or managers were four and three times, respectively, less likely to indicate concern. By contrast, consultants and sisters (senior nurses) were more likely to give concern ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Guidance on the selection of assessors in any MSF process should take into account findings that rating behaviour varies by staff group.

Sexual health care training needs of general practitioner trainers: a regional survey.

OBJECTIVES: The National Strategy for Sexual Health and HIV aims to facilitate improved patient access to sexual health care, primarily in general practice. This study aimed to identify sexual health care provision in general practitioner (GP) training practices and highlight training and resource implications of the strategy for GPs and prospective GPs. METHODS: Data were gathered from interviews with five key representatives (all of whom had a special interest in GP training and/or sexual health care) and a self-completed questionnaire survey of all 374 GP trainers in the West Midlands region. The questionnaire was developed from the interviews and comprised three sections: sample characteristics; current practice; and 30 statements to elicit attitudes, knowledge and training implications. The questionnaire was mailed out in March 2002 with two re-mailings at 2-week intervals. RESULTS: Most GP trainers (79%; n=295) returned completed questionnaires. Most respondents were already offering some 'Level 1 services' or were prepared to including cervical screening (100%; n=295), sexual history taking (95%; n=271), sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing (74%; n=217), HIV testing (68%; n=198) and contraceptive services (71%; n=208). However, most (86%; n=251) needed further information on the Strategy detail and its implications. Training needs in sexual history taking, STI testing and HIV testing were also highlighted. Most GP trainers (62%; n=181) believed GP registrars were relatively unprepared for sexual health care and proposed improved training and assessment. Appropriate nurse training should also be provided. CONCLUSION: Although 82% (n=242) of respondents would implement the Strategy if properly resourced, considerable training and support needs were identified.