Dataset Information

Bug Busters: Who you gonna call? Professional development for healthcare simulation technology specialists.

ABSTRACT: SimGHOSTS introduced Bug Busters to train healthcare simulation technology specialists (HSTSs) as a way to showcase experienced HSTSs' approaches to technology troubleshooting. This competition functions as a collaborative exchange of technology and operational solutions. It has been stated that Bug Busters is an equivalent to SimWars but for technology specialists. The competition starts with groups of individuals that function in the role of HSTSs. They are given a set of tasks that need to be completed within 10?min prior to a pending simulation scenario. The simulation room is designed with planned technical glitches, equipment that is defective, or inappropriate setup. There are multiple rounds of competition at a group level. In the final round, individual HSTSs from the advancing group complete challenges to win the competition. The number of correct tasks completed is used as the primary score determinant with time being the tie breaker. During each round, a set of distractors is introduced for a time bonus, asking technical or simulation-based questions that might be encountered in daily work. The competition demonstrates the need for HSTSs and provides an innovative way to acknowledge the complexity of their work and assess their skills. To ensure that the field of simulation continues to expand, training opportunities must be provided for all those involved in simulation. Bug Busters is one way to train and encourage "out of the box" thinking for HSTSs.

SUBMITTER: Crawford S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6567489 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Bug Busters: Who you gonna call? Professional development for healthcare simulation technology specialists.

Crawford Scott S Monks Stormy S Bailey Rachel R Fernandez Alaina A

Advances in simulation (London, England) 20190613

SimGHOSTS introduced Bug Busters to train healthcare simulation technology specialists (HSTSs) as a way to showcase experienced HSTSs' approaches to technology troubleshooting. This competition functions as a collaborative exchange of technology and operational solutions. It has been stated that Bug Busters is an equivalent to SimWars but for technology specialists. The competition starts with groups of individuals that function in the role of HSTSs. They are given a set of tasks that need to be ...[more]

PMID: 31223490

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealth outcomes of Indigenous patients are impacted by culturally unsafe specialty care environments. The 'Educating for Equity (E4E)' program is a continuing professional development (CPD) intervention which incorporates skill-based teaching to improve Indigenous patient experiences and outcomes in healthcare interactions.MethodsThe E4E program was delivered to rheumatologists in two phases, each delivered as experiential learning workshops where participants engaged with and applied course content within an interactive format focusing on real-time feedback. The phase 1 workshop focused on skill development of E4E Framework concepts and principles. Phase 2 concentrated on building capacity for teaching of E4E content. Evaluation of the program's effectiveness was through longitudinal responses to the Social Cultural Confidence in Care Survey (SCCCS), self-reported strategies employed to address social issues and improve therapeutic relationships, engagement with teaching others, and satisfaction with the program.ResultsTwo cohorts of participants have participated in the program (n = 24 Phase 1, n = 10 Phase 2). For participants completing both phases of training, statistically significant improvements were observed in exploring social factors with patients, gaining knowledge and skills related to cultural aspects of care, improved communication and relationship building, and reflections on held stereotypes. Strategies to address social issues and build therapeutic relationships remained consistent throughout participation, while the training enhanced exploration and confidence to ask about cultural and traditional practices, and stronger communication strategies for exploring beliefs, expectations, social barriers, and residential school impacts on health. Participants reported feeling prepared to teach Indigenous health concepts to others and subsequently lead teaching with residents, fellows, and allied health professionals. Satisfaction with the delivery and content of the workshops was high, and participants valued interactions with peers in learning.ConclusionsThis CPD intervention had a beneficial impact on self-reported confidence and enhanced practice strategies to engage with Indigenous patients.

Project description:Background:Continuing professional development (CPD) activities delivered by simulation to independently practicing physicians are becoming increasingly popular. At present, the educational potential of such simulations is limited by the inability to create effective curricula for the CPD audience. In contrast to medical trainees, CPD activities lack pre-defined learning expectations and, instead, emphasize self-directed learning, which may not encompass true learning needs. We hypothesize that we could generate an interprofessional CPD simulation curriculum for practicing pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physicians in a single-center tertiary care hospital using a deliberative approach combined with Kern's six-step method of curriculum development. Methods:From a comprehensive core list of 94 possible PEM clinical presentations and procedures, we generated an 18-scenario CPD simulation curriculum. We conducted a comprehensive perceived and unperceived needs assessment on topics to include, incorporating opinions of faculty PEM physicians, hospital leadership, interprofessional colleagues, and expert opinion on patient benefit, simulation feasibility, and value of simulating the case for learning. To systematically rank items while balancing the needs of all stakeholders, we used a prioritization matrix to generate objective "priority scores." These scores were used by CPD planners to deliberately determine the simulation curriculum contents. Results:We describe a novel three-step CPD simulation curriculum design method involving (1) systematic and deliberate needs assessment, (2) systematic prioritization, and (3) curriculum synthesis. Of practicing PEM physicians, 17/20 responded to the perceived learning needs survey, while 6/6 leaders responded to the unperceived needs assessment. These ranked data were input to a five-variable prioritization matrix generating priority scores. Based on local needs, the highest 18 scoring clinical presentations and procedures were selected for final inclusion in a PEM CPD simulation curriculum. An interim survey of PEM physician (21/24 respondents) opinions was collected, with 90% finding educational value with the curriculum. The curriculum includes items not identified by self-directed learning that PEM physicians thought should be included. Conclusions:We highlight a novel methodology for PEM physicians that can be adapted by other specialities when designing their own CPD simulation curriculum. This methodology objectively considers and prioritizes the needs of practicing physicians and stakeholders involved in CPD.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Technological support may be crucial in optimizing healthcare professional practice and improving patient outcomes. A focus on electronic health records has left other technological supports relatively neglected. Additionally, there has been no comparison between different types of technology-based interventions, and the importance of delivery setting on the implementation of technology-based interventions to change professional practice. Consequently, there is a need to synthesise and examine intervention characteristics using a methodology suited to identifying important features of effective interventions, and the barriers and facilitators to implementation. Three aims were addressed: to identify interventions with a technological component that are successful at changing professional practice, to determine if and how such interventions are theory-based, and to examine barriers and facilitators to successful implementation. METHODS:A literature review informed by realist review methods was conducted involving a systematic search of studies reporting either: (1) behavior change interventions that included technology to support professional practice change; or (2) barriers and facilitators to implementation of technological interventions. Extracted data was quantitative and qualitative, and included setting, target professionals, and use of Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs). The primary outcome was a change in professional practice. A thematic analysis was conducted on studies reporting barriers and facilitators of implementation. RESULTS:Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria; 48 (27 randomized controlled trials) reported behavior change interventions and 21 reported practicalities of implementation. The most successful technological intervention was decision support providing healthcare professionals with knowledge and/or person-specific information to assist with patient management. Successful technologies were more likely to operationalise BCTs, particularly "instruction on how to perform the behavior". Facilitators of implementation included aligning studies with organisational initiatives, ensuring senior peer endorsement, and integration into clinical workload. Barriers included organisational challenges, and design, content and technical issues of technology-based interventions. CONCLUSIONS:Technological interventions must focus on providing decision support for clinical practice using recognized behavior change techniques. Interventions must consider organizational context, clinical workload, and have clearly defined benefits for improving practice and patient outcomes.

Project description:Background:Immersion is important for simulation-based education; however, questionnaire-based instruments to measure immersion have some limitations. The aim of the present work is to develop a new instrument to measure immersion among participants in healthcare simulation scenarios. Methods:The instrument was developed in four phases: trigger identification, content validity scores, inter-rater reliability analysis and comparison with an existing immersion measure instrument. A modified Delphi process was used to develop the instrument and to establish validity and reliability. The expert panel consisted of 10 researchers. All the researchers in the team had previous experience of simulation in the health and/or fire and rescue services as researchers and/or educators and simulation designers. To identify triggers, the panel members independently screened video recordings from simulation scenarios. Here, a trigger is an event in a simulation that is considered a sign of reduced or enhanced immersion among simulation participants. Results:The result consists of the Immersion Score Rating Instrument (ISRI). It contains 10 triggers, of which seven indicate reduced and three enhanced immersion. When using ISRI, a rater identifies trigger occurrences and assigns them strength between 1 and 3. The content validity analysis shows that all the 10 triggers meet an acceptable content validity index for items (I-CVI) standard. The inter-rater reliability (IRR) among raters was assessed using a two-way mixed, consistency, average-measures intra-class correlation (ICC). The ICC for the difference between weighted positive and negative triggers was 0.92, which indicates that the raters are in agreement. Comparison with results from an immersion questionnaire mirrors the ISRI results. Conclusions:In conclusion, we present a novel and non-intrusive instrument for identifying and rating the level of immersion among participants in healthcare simulation scenarios.

Project description:BackgroundGiven the challenge of chronic lifestyle diseases, the shift in healthcare focus to primary care and recognised importance of a preventive approach to health, including exercise prescription, the embedding of related learning in healthcare professional programmes is critical.MethodsIn response to these contemporary demands, a complex curriculum development project was undertaken at University College Dublin, employing a four dimensional curriculum framework for the development of health professional curricula, that focused on (1) future orientation of healthcare practices (the why?), (2) defining capabilities of graduates (the what?), (3) teaching, learning and assessment (the how?) and (4) organisation/institution delivery (the where)? The process was informed by latest exercise, health promotion, educational and health policy literature, alongside engagement with multiple internal university and external community stakeholders.ResultsHaving sufficient clinical education opportunity for translating exercise theory into practice was identified as a key need (the Why?). Development of strategies for health promotion and design and delivery of evidence based exercise programmes with inter-professional and inter-sectoral network building were some of the graduate capabilities identified as being critically important. (the what?) The resultant UCD Physio Hub model of clinical education combines 'on campus' and 'community outreach' activity to facilitate inter-sectoral 'real world' experiential student learning in health promotion and exercise prescription for both healthy and clinical populations. Underpinned by social constructivist educational theory, students are encouraged to be creative and to collaborate in responding to identified health needs of specific community groups by designing and delivering community services. (the how?) In developing new student learning opportunities to enhance curriculum, a supportive organisational culture and context was critical with UCD having excellent exercise infrastructure and the Physio Hub project aligning with a community engagement ethos articulated in the university's strategy. (the where?) CONCLUSION: This paper provides an overview of Physio Hub, its services, educational practices and translational research ethos, all of which are combined to deliver a rich exercise and health promotion learning experience. Although developed for physiotherapy in this instance, the curriculum process and resultant education model could be applied across medical and other health professional programmes and to facilitate interdisciplinary learning.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Effective communication between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is important to enhance outcomes in multiple sclerosis (MS). However, in practice, patients often report a disconnect in communication. Communication tools to aid patient-HCP communication have a long history of use in many chronic conditions. For example, symptom diaries have been shown to enhance outcomes in cancer, headache and sleep disorder management. MS in the 21st Century, a Steering Group of HCP specialists and patients with MS (PwMS), has created two communication tools designed for use by both patients and their HCPs. METHODS:The Steering Group first identified prominent issues in patient-HCP communication through group discussions and survey data. Following this, a series of workshops led to the development of two communication tools as potential solutions to these identified issues in communication. RESULTS:The two most prominent issues identified were HCP time constraints during appointments and the misalignment of patient and HCP priorities-the communication tools developed through the workshops were created to address these. The "myMS priorities" tool [see supplementary materials] is designed to maximize the use of consultation time while the "myMS commitments" tool [see supplementary materials] aims to improve patient-HCP shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS:The MS in the 21st Century Steering Group adopted a broad, iterative and collaborative approach in the development of these tools to help ensure they would be as useful as possible to both HCPs and PwMS. These tools have been developed through shared patient-HCP expertise and are based on existing tools in other therapy areas as well as a review of the existing literature and data from MS in the 21st Century Steering Group surveys. The next steps will focus on the validation of these tools through testing them in real-world environments and clinical trials. FUNDING:Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Dataset Information

Bug Busters: Who you gonna call? Professional development for healthcare simulation technology specialists.

Publications

Bug Busters: Who you gonna call? Professional development for healthcare simulation technology specialists.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure