Dataset Information

An Analysis of the Educational Environment at the Malta Foundation Programme Using the Postgraduate Hospital Educational Environment Measure (PHEEM).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Learning from managing patients in a real-world context is by far superior to simulation learning. A substandard educational environment is associated with poor patient care and suboptimal learning outcomes. The measurement of the educational environment provides insight into what is needed to improve the level of training.

Objective

To measure the educational environment as perceived by trainees within the Malta Foundation Programme.

Methods

This study used the Postgraduate Hospital Educational Environment Measure (PHEEM) to measure the educational environment at the Malta Foundation Programme. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographics of the study population. Nonparametric comparative statistics were used to identify statistically significant differences between groups.

Results

Ninety-eight trainees out of 370 (26.5%) completed the online questionnaire. These consisted of 39 FY1s (31.5% of 124), 33 FY2s (24.8% of 133), and 26 extended FYs (23.0% of 113). The 40-item PHEEM showed good reliability with a Cronbach's α value of .912. These doctors perceived their educational environment as more positive than negative. Perceptions are worst among trainees at the end of their first year of training. Those who had just finished their training have reported better perceptions. The 3 worst scoring items are related to when the trainees are on call.

Conclusion

Among trainees within the Malta Foundation Programme, perceptions of role autonomy and social support are areas where most work is needed. Teaching seems to be moving in the right direction, but there is always room for improvement.

SUBMITTER: Grech M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8312193 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCurrent instruments to evaluate the postgraduate medical educational environment lack theoretical frameworks and are relatively long, which may reduce response rates. We aimed to develop and validate a brief instrument that, based on a solid theoretical framework for educational environments, solicits resident feedback to screen the postgraduate medical educational environment quality.MethodsStepwise, we developed a screening instrument, using existing instruments to assess educational environment quality and adopting a theoretical framework that defines three educational environment domains: content, atmosphere and organization. First, items from relevant existing instruments were collected and, after deleting duplicates and items not specifically addressing educational environment, grouped into the three domains. In a Delphi procedure, the item list was reduced to a set of items considered most important and comprehensively covering the three domains. These items were triangulated against the results of semi-structured interviews with 26 residents from three teaching hospitals to achieve face validity. This draft version of the Scan of Postgraduate Educational Environment Domains (SPEED) was administered to residents in a general and university hospital and further reduced and validated based on the data collected.ResultsTwo hundred twenty-three residents completed the 43-item draft SPEED. We used half of the dataset for item reduction, and the other half for validating the resulting SPEED (15 items, 5 per domain). Internal consistencies were high. Correlations between domain scores in the draft and brief versions of SPEED were high (>0.85) and highly significant (p<0.001). Domain score variance of the draft instrument was explained for ≥80% by the items representing the domains in the final SPEED.ConclusionsThe SPEED comprehensively covers the three educational environment domains defined in the theoretical framework. Because of its validity and brevity, the SPEED is promising as useful and easily applicable tool to regularly screen educational environment quality in postgraduate medical education.