Cargando…

Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design

BACKGROUND: Systematic evaluations of clinical placements are rare, especially when offered alongside academic postgraduate courses. An evidence-based approach is important to allow pedagogically-driven provision, rather than that solely governed by opinion or market demand. Our evaluation assessed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yiend, Jenny, Tracy, Derek K., Sreenan, Brian, Cardi, Valentina, Foulkes, Tina, Koutsantoni, Katerina, Kravariti, Eugenia, Tchanturia, Kate, Willmott, Lucy, Shergill, Sukhi, Reedy, Gabriel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4754931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26882894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0575-7
_version_ 1782416114665390080
author Yiend, Jenny
Tracy, Derek K.
Sreenan, Brian
Cardi, Valentina
Foulkes, Tina
Koutsantoni, Katerina
Kravariti, Eugenia
Tchanturia, Kate
Willmott, Lucy
Shergill, Sukhi
Reedy, Gabriel
author_facet Yiend, Jenny
Tracy, Derek K.
Sreenan, Brian
Cardi, Valentina
Foulkes, Tina
Koutsantoni, Katerina
Kravariti, Eugenia
Tchanturia, Kate
Willmott, Lucy
Shergill, Sukhi
Reedy, Gabriel
author_sort Yiend, Jenny
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Systematic evaluations of clinical placements are rare, especially when offered alongside academic postgraduate courses. An evidence-based approach is important to allow pedagogically-driven provision, rather than that solely governed by opinion or market demand. Our evaluation assessed a voluntary clinical placement scheme allied to a mental health course. METHODS: Data were collected over academic years 2010/11– 2013/14, from participating students (n = 20 to 58) and clinician supervisors (n = 10–12), using a mixed-methods cross-sectional design. Quantitative evaluation captured information on uptake, dropout, resource use, attitudes and experience, using standardized (the Placement Evaluation Questionnaire; the Scale To Assess the Therapeutic Relationship – Clinical version and the University of Toronto Placement Supervisor Evaluation) and bespoke questionnaires and audit data. Qualitative evaluation comprised two focus groups (5 clinicians, 5 students), to investigate attitudes, experience, perceived benefits, disadvantages and desired future developments. Data were analysed using framework analysis to identify a priori and emergent themes. RESULTS: High uptake (around 70 placements per annum), low dropout (2–3 students per annum; 5 %) and positive focus group comments suggested placements successfully provided added value and catered sufficiently to student demand. Students’ responses confirmed that placements met expectations and the perception of benefit remained after completion with 70 % (n = 14) reporting an overall positive experience, 75 % (n = 15) reporting a pleasant learning experience, 60 % (n = 12) feeling that their clinical skills were enhanced and 85 % (n = 17) believing that it would benefit other students. Placements contributed the equivalent of seven full time unskilled posts per annum to local health care services. While qualitative data revealed perceived ‘mutual benefit’ for both students and clinicians, this was qualified by the inherent limitations of students’ time and expertise. Areas for development included fostering learning around professionalism and students’ confidence on placement. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of healthcare placements to academic postgraduate taught courses can improve their attractiveness to applicants, benefit healthcare services and enhance students’ perception of their learning experiences. Well-positioned and supported placement learning opportunities could become a key differentiator for academic courses, over potential competitors. However, the actual implications for student employability and achievement remain to be established.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4754931
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47549312016-02-17 Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design Yiend, Jenny Tracy, Derek K. Sreenan, Brian Cardi, Valentina Foulkes, Tina Koutsantoni, Katerina Kravariti, Eugenia Tchanturia, Kate Willmott, Lucy Shergill, Sukhi Reedy, Gabriel BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Systematic evaluations of clinical placements are rare, especially when offered alongside academic postgraduate courses. An evidence-based approach is important to allow pedagogically-driven provision, rather than that solely governed by opinion or market demand. Our evaluation assessed a voluntary clinical placement scheme allied to a mental health course. METHODS: Data were collected over academic years 2010/11– 2013/14, from participating students (n = 20 to 58) and clinician supervisors (n = 10–12), using a mixed-methods cross-sectional design. Quantitative evaluation captured information on uptake, dropout, resource use, attitudes and experience, using standardized (the Placement Evaluation Questionnaire; the Scale To Assess the Therapeutic Relationship – Clinical version and the University of Toronto Placement Supervisor Evaluation) and bespoke questionnaires and audit data. Qualitative evaluation comprised two focus groups (5 clinicians, 5 students), to investigate attitudes, experience, perceived benefits, disadvantages and desired future developments. Data were analysed using framework analysis to identify a priori and emergent themes. RESULTS: High uptake (around 70 placements per annum), low dropout (2–3 students per annum; 5 %) and positive focus group comments suggested placements successfully provided added value and catered sufficiently to student demand. Students’ responses confirmed that placements met expectations and the perception of benefit remained after completion with 70 % (n = 14) reporting an overall positive experience, 75 % (n = 15) reporting a pleasant learning experience, 60 % (n = 12) feeling that their clinical skills were enhanced and 85 % (n = 17) believing that it would benefit other students. Placements contributed the equivalent of seven full time unskilled posts per annum to local health care services. While qualitative data revealed perceived ‘mutual benefit’ for both students and clinicians, this was qualified by the inherent limitations of students’ time and expertise. Areas for development included fostering learning around professionalism and students’ confidence on placement. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of healthcare placements to academic postgraduate taught courses can improve their attractiveness to applicants, benefit healthcare services and enhance students’ perception of their learning experiences. Well-positioned and supported placement learning opportunities could become a key differentiator for academic courses, over potential competitors. However, the actual implications for student employability and achievement remain to be established. BioMed Central 2016-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4754931/ /pubmed/26882894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0575-7 Text en © Yiend et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Yiend, Jenny
Tracy, Derek K.
Sreenan, Brian
Cardi, Valentina
Foulkes, Tina
Koutsantoni, Katerina
Kravariti, Eugenia
Tchanturia, Kate
Willmott, Lucy
Shergill, Sukhi
Reedy, Gabriel
Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
title Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
title_full Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
title_fullStr Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
title_full_unstemmed Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
title_short Post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
title_sort post graduate clinical placements: evaluating benefits and challenges with a mixed methods cross sectional design
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4754931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26882894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0575-7
work_keys_str_mv AT yiendjenny postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT tracyderekk postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT sreenanbrian postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT cardivalentina postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT foulkestina postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT koutsantonikaterina postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT kravaritieugenia postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT tchanturiakate postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT willmottlucy postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT shergillsukhi postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign
AT reedygabriel postgraduateclinicalplacementsevaluatingbenefitsandchallengeswithamixedmethodscrosssectionaldesign