Dataset Information

Distance learning and patient safety: Report and evaluation of an online patient safety course.

ABSTRACT: Patient safety is a critical topic in health care globally, with implications for nurses, physicians, administrators, and most importantly, patients and their well-being. Online distance learning (ODL) is widely accepted among most disciplines in higher education and has been used to promote patient safety knowledge among health care students and professionals in diverse contexts. This article reports on an online Nursing and Patient Safety course developed in 2012 by the University of Miami School of Nursing and Health Studies in conjunction with the Pan American Health Organization and the International Network for Nursing and Patient Safety. The study's objectives are to describe the implementation of an international ODL program to enhance patient safety knowledge in nurses and nursing students, and to examine the participants' assessments of this online approach as an effective learning tool. Most participants who completed the Nursing and Patient Safety ODL course reported being satisfied with the course content and experience, and demonstrated increased knowledge on patient safety, as measured by post-module quizzes and self-report. Limitations of the study include the lack of a comparison group, disparity in the number of participants across the course's language formats (English, Portuguese, Spanish), and the large number of participants who registered for but did not complete the course. Future research should identify obstacles to course completion, explore participants' awareness of patient safety issues and perceived need for more instruction, and look at ways to disseminate the course to the broadest international population of nurses and nursing students.

SUBMITTER: Ortega J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7236860 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Distance learning and patient safety: Report and evaluation of an online patient safety course.

Ortega Johis J Cometto Maria Cristina MC Zárate Grajales Rosa A RA Malvárez Silvina S Cassiani Silvia S Falconi Carmen C Friedeberg Daniel D Peragallo-Montano Nilda N

Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health 20200520

Patient safety is a critical topic in health care globally, with implications for nurses, physicians, administrators, and most importantly, patients and their well-being. Online distance learning (ODL) is widely accepted among most disciplines in higher education and has been used to promote patient safety knowledge among health care students and professionals in diverse contexts. This article reports on an online Nursing and Patient Safety course developed in 2012 by the University of Miami Sch ...[more]

PMID: 32435264

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical training during the COVID-19 pandemic is high risk for medical students. Medical schools in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have limited capacity to develop resources in the face of rapidly developing health emergencies. Here, a free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) was developed as a COVID-19 resource for medical students working in these settings, and its effectiveness was evaluated.MethodsThe RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework was utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of MOOC in teaching medical students about COVID-19. The data sources included the student registration forms, metrics quantifying their interactions within the modules, students' course feedback, and free-text responses. The data were collected from the Moodle learning management system and Google analytics from May 9 to September 15, 2020. The research team analyzed the quantitative data descriptively and the qualitative data thematically.ResultsAmong the 16,237 unique visitors who accessed the course, only 6031 medical students from 71 medical schools registered, and about 4993 (83% of registrants) completed the course, indicating high levels of satisfaction (M = 8.17, SD = 1.49) on a 10-point scale. The mean scores of each assessment modules were > 90%. The free-text responses from 987 unique students revealed a total of 17 themes (e.g., knowing the general information on COVID-19, process management of the pandemic in public health, online platform use, and instructional design) across the elements of the RE-AIM framework. Mainly, the students characterized the MOOC as well-organized and effective.ConclusionsMedical students learned about COVID-19 using a self-paced and unmonitored MOOC. MOOCs could play a vital role in the dissemination of accurate information to medical students in LMIC in future public health emergencies. The students were interested in using similar MOOCs in the future.

Project description:BackgroundEducation about patient safety has historically been limited in health professionals curricula and largely inaccessible to the general public. We developed a massive open online course (MOOC), The Science of Safety in Healthcare, to present the foundational patient safety principles to a broad global audience of health professionals, learners, and patients interested in patient safety.ObjectivesTo describe the Science of Safety in Healthcare MOOC, its effects on patient safety competence, and the satisfaction of course participants.MethodsThe five-week video-based course was delivered in 2013 and 2014, and was organized in five modules: 1) overview of science of safety and safety culture, 2) enabling and contextual factors that influence patient safety and quality, 3) methods to improve safety and quality, 4) translating evidence intro practice and leading change, and 5) summary and opportunities for capacity building. Each module had three or four segments. Participants were introduced to key concepts, and tools and skills to promote patient safety. Participants completed the Health Professional Education in Patient Safety Survey (H-PEPSS), which measures patient safety competence, and a course satisfaction survey. Pre- and post- course H-PEPSS scores were compared using paired t-tests. Course satisfaction surveys were administered at the completion of the course and six months later.ResultsA total of 20,957, and 9679 participants enrolled in the course in 2013 and 2014, respectively. About half of participants were 25-44 years old (57%), and female (54%). Participants joined from over 100 countries. The majority were health professionals (61%) or health professionals in training (7%). Mean H-PEPSS scores improved after course completion, with significant increases on all survey domains in both years (p < 0.01). Mean score differences were: Teamwork 0.68 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.71), Communication 0.70 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.73), Managing Risk 0.79 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.82), Human Environment 0.64 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.68), Recognizing and Responding 0.64 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.68), and Culture 0.72 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.75). About 8% of participants in each cohort earned a certificate of completion. At 6-months post-course, the majority of the participants agreed or agreed strongly that the course content was useful (93%) and that the course positively influenced their clinical practice (69%) and communication (84%).ConclusionsThe MOOC course allowed educators to reach a large, diverse audience. The course was well-received and participants reported a significant increase in patient safety competence. As with most MOOCs, rates of completion were low.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Massive open online courses (MOOCs) have the potential to make a broader educational impact because many learners undertake these courses. Despite their reach, there is a lack of knowledge about which methods are used for evaluating these courses. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this review was to identify current MOOC evaluation methods to inform future study designs. METHODS:We systematically searched the following databases for studies published from January 2008 to October 2018: (1) Scopus, (2) Education Resources Information Center, (3) IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) Xplore, (4) PubMed, (5) Web of Science, (6) British Education Index, and (7) Google Scholar search engine. Two reviewers independently screened the abstracts and titles of the studies. Published studies in the English language that evaluated MOOCs were included. The study design of the evaluations, the underlying motivation for the evaluation studies, data collection, and data analysis methods were quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed. The quality of the included studies was appraised using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the National Institutes of Health-National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute quality assessment tool for cohort observational studies and for before-after (pre-post) studies with no control group. RESULTS:The initial search resulted in 3275 studies, and 33 eligible studies were included in this review. In total, 16 studies used a quantitative study design, 11 used a qualitative design, and 6 used a mixed methods study design. In all, 16 studies evaluated learner characteristics and behavior, and 20 studies evaluated learning outcomes and experiences. A total of 12 studies used 1 data source, 11 used 2 data sources, 7 used 3 data sources, 4 used 2 data sources, and 1 used 5 data sources. Overall, 3 studies used more than 3 data sources in their evaluation. In terms of the data analysis methods, quantitative methods were most prominent with descriptive and inferential statistics, which were the top 2 preferred methods. In all, 26 studies with a cross-sectional design had a low-quality assessment, whereas RCTs and quasi-experimental studies received a high-quality assessment. CONCLUSIONS:The MOOC evaluation data collection and data analysis methods should be determined carefully on the basis of the aim of the evaluation. The MOOC evaluations are subject to bias, which could be reduced using pre-MOOC measures for comparison or by controlling for confounding variables. Future MOOC evaluations should consider using more diverse data sources and data analysis methods. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR2-10.2196/12087.

Project description:BackgroundInterprofessional education (IPE) interventions are not always successful in achieving learning outcomes. Team-Based Learning (TBL) would appear to be a suitable pedagogical method for IPE, as it focuses on team performance; however, little is known about interprofessional TBL as an instructional framework for patient safety. In this pilot-study, we aimed to (1) describe participants' reactions to TBL, (2) observe their achievement with respect to interprofessional education learning objectives, and (3) document their attitudinal shifts with regard to patient safety behaviours.MethodsWe developed and implemented a three-day course for pre-qualifying, non-medical healthcare students to give instruction on non-technical skills related to 'learning from errors'. The course consisted of three sequential modules: 'Recognizing Errors', 'Analysing Errors', and 'Reporting Errors'. The evaluation took place within a quasi-experimental pre-test-post-test study design. Participants completed self-assessments through valid and reliable instruments such as the Mennenga's TBL Student Assessment Instrument and the University of the West of England's Interprofessional Questionnaire. The mean scores of the individual readiness assurance tests were compared with the scores of the group readiness assurance test in order to explore if students learned from each other during group discussions. Data was analysed using descriptive (i.e. mean, standard deviation), parametric (i.e. paired t-test), and non-parametric (i.e. Wilcoxon signed-rank test) methods.ResultsThirty-nine students from five different bachelor's programs attended the course. The participants positively rated TBL as an instructional approach. All teams outperformed the mean score of their individual members during the readiness assurance process. We observed significant improvements in 'communication and teamwork' and 'interprofessional learning' but not in 'interprofessional interaction' and 'interprofessional relationships.' Findings on safety attitudes and behaviours were mixed.ConclusionTBL was well received by the students. Our first findings indicate that interprofessional TBL seems to be a promising pedagogical method to achieve patient safety learning objectives. It is crucial to develop relevant clinical cases that involve all professions. Further research with larger sample sizes (e.g. including medical students) and more rigorous study designs (e.g. pre-test post-test with a control group) is needed to confirm our preliminary findings.

Project description:BackgroundGlobal Health Education (GHE) focuses on training proactive global citizens to tackle health challenges in an increasingly interconnected and interdependent world. Studies show that health professionals in training have reported that GHE has improved their teamwork, responsiveness to contextual factors that impact health, and understanding of health systems; however, there is little research on the impact of GHE courses in undergraduate settings, especially in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsOur study analyzes a multidisciplinary online global health course at Tecnologico de Monterrey, México. We conducted a cross-sectional study with pre- and post-design. Students who took the multidisciplinary course of Global Health for Leaders in the Fall of 2019 (n = 153) and Spring of 2020 (n = 348) were selected for this study. Using a five-point Likert scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree), the survey assessed seven competencies as well as questions about course expectations, takeaways, and recommendations to improve the course. We performed descriptive statistical analyses comparing the combined pre-tests (from Fall and Spring cohorts) to the combined post-tests. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the samples.ResultsOf the 501 pre-course surveys administered, 456 responses were completed in the pre-course and 435 in the post-course (91% overall response rate). Only 8.7% of the respondents in the pre-course survey strongly agreed that they could describe fundamental aspects of global health such as the Millennium Development Goals or Sustainable Development Goals, in contrast to a 56% of the students who strongly agreed in the post-course survey (p < 0.001). Similar differences were captured in understanding the global burden of disease, social determinants of health, the effects of globalization in health, health systems' goals and functions, and human rights. 38% felt that the course helped them develop a more empathetic perception of the suffering of others experiencing global health-related issues.ConclusionIn this study, we have presented our experience in teaching an online global health course for multidisciplinary undergraduates in a LMIC. The competencies reported by our students indicate that the course prepared them to confront complex global health issues.

Dataset Information

Distance learning and patient safety: Report and evaluation of an online patient safety course.

Publications

Distance learning and patient safety: Report and evaluation of an online patient safety course.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets