Search

Background People with dementia have unique palliative and end-of-life needs. However, access to quality palliative and end-of-life care for people with dementia living in nursing homes is often suboptimal. There is a recognised need for nursing home staff training in dementia-specific palliative care to equip them with knowledge and skills to deliver high quality care. Objective The primary aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a simulation training intervention (IMPETUS-D) aimed at nursing home staff on reducing unplanned transfers to hospital and/or deaths in hospital among residents living with dementia. Design Cluster randomised controlled trial of nursing homes with process evaluation conducted alongside. Subjects & setting One thousand three hundred four people with dementia living in 24 nursing homes (12 intervention/12 control) in three Australian cities, their families and direct care staff. Methods Randomisation was conducted at the level of the nursing home (cluster). The allocation sequence was generated by an independent statistician using a computer-generated allocation sequence. Staff from intervention nursing homes had access to the IMPETUS-D training intervention, and staff from control nursing homes had access to usual training opportunities. The predicted primary outcome measure was a 20% reduction in the proportion of people with dementia who had an unplanned transfer to hospital and/or death in hospital at 6-months follow-up in the intervention nursing homes compared to the control nursing homes. Results At 6-months follow-up, 128 (21.1%) people with dementia from the intervention group had an unplanned transfer or death in hospital compared to 132 (19.0%) residents from the control group; odds ratio 1.14 (95% CI, 0.82-1.59). There were suboptimal levels of staff participation in the training intervention and several barriers to participation identified. Conclusion This study of a dementia-specific palliative care staff training intervention found no difference in the proportion of residents with dementia who had an unplanned hospital transfer. Implementation of the intervention was challenging and likely did not achieve adequate staff coverage to improve staff practice or resident outcomes. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12618002012257. Registered 14 December 2018.

BackgroundFace-to-face feedback plays an important role in health professionals’ workplace learning. The literature describes guiding principles regarding effective feedback but it is not clear how to enact these. We aimed to create a Feedback Quality Instrument (FQI), underpinned by a social constructivist perspective, to assist educators in collaborating with learners to support learner-centred feedback interactions. In earlier research, we developed a set of observable educator behaviours designed to promote beneficial learner outcomes, supported by published research and expert consensus. This research focused on analysing and refining this provisional instrument, to create the FQI ready-to-use.MethodsWe collected videos of authentic face-to-face feedback discussions, involving educators (senior clinicians) and learners (clinicians or students), during routine clinical practice across a major metropolitan hospital network. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of the video data were used to refine the provisional instrument. Raters administered the provisional instrument to systematically analyse educators’ feedback practice seen in the videos. This enabled usability testing and resulted in ratings data for psychometric analysis involving multifaceted Rasch model analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Parallel qualitative research of the video transcripts focused on two under-researched areas, psychological safety and evaluative judgement, to provide practical insights for item refinement. The provisional instrument was revised, using an iterative process, incorporating findings from usability testing, psychometric testing and parallel qualitative research and foundational research.ResultsThirty-six videos involved diverse health professionals across medicine, nursing and physiotherapy. Administering the provisional instrument generated 174 data sets. Following refinements, the FQI contained 25 items, clustered into five domains characterising core concepts underpinning quality feedback:set the scene,analyse performance,plan improvements,foster learner agency, andfoster psychological safety.ConclusionsThe FQI describes practical, empirically-informed ways for educators to foster quality, learner-centred feedback discussions. The explicit descriptions offer guidance for educators and provide a foundation for the systematic analysis of the influence of specific educator behaviours on learner outcomes.

ObjectiveVerbal face-to-face feedback on clinical task performance is a fundamental component of health professions education. Experts argue that feedback is critical for performance improvement, but the evidence is limited. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effect of face-to-face verbal feedback from a health professional, compared with alternative or no feedback, on the objective workplace task performance of another health professional.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched the full holdings of Ovid MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to 1 February 2019 and searched references of included studies. Two authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials investigating the effect of feedback, in which health professionals were randomised to individual verbal face-to-face feedback compared with no feedback or alternative feedback and available as full-text publications in English. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. For feedback compared with no feedback, outcome data from included studies were pooled using a random effects model.ResultsIn total, 26 trials met the inclusion criteria, involving 2307 participants. For the effect of verbal face-to-face feedback on performance compared with no feedback, when studies at high risk of bias were excluded, eight studies involving 392 health professionals were included in a meta-analysis: the standardised mean difference (SMD) was 0.7 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.03; pConclusionsVerbal face-to-face feedback in the health professions may result in a moderate to large improvement in workplace task performance, compared with no feedback. However, the quality of evidence was low, primarily due to risk of bias and publication bias. Further research is needed. In particular, we found a lack of high-quality trials that clearly reported key components likely to influence performance.Trial registration numberCRD42017081796.

Context Feedback conversations play a central role in health professions workplace learning. However, learners face a dilemma: if they engage in productive learning behaviours (such as asking questions, raising difficulties, offering opinions or contesting ideas), they risk exposing their limitations or offending the educator. This highlights the importance of psychological safety in encouraging learners to candidly engage in interactive dialogue and the co-construction of knowledge. Previous research has recommended that building safety, trust or an educational alliance is key to productive feedback encounters. Yet it is unclear how to translate this into practice. Hence our research question was: What does psychological safety look like in workplace feedback and how can educators work with learners to foster it? Methods We analysed 36 videos of routine formal feedback episodes in clinical practice involving diverse health professionals. A psychologically safe learning environment was inferred when learners progressively disclosed information and engaged in productive learning behaviours during the conversation. We used thematic analysis to identify associated educator strategies, which seemed to promote psychological safety. Results Four themes were identified: (a) setting the scene for dialogue and candour; (b) educator as ally; (c) a continuing improvement orientation, and (d) encouraging interactive dialogue. Educators approaches captured within these themes, seemed to foster a psychologically safe environment by conveying a focus on learning, and demonstrating respect and support to learners. Conclusions This study builds on claims regarding the importance of psychological safety in feedback by clarifying what psychological safety in workplace feedback conversations might look like and identifying associated educator approaches. The results may offer educators practical ways they could work with learners to encourage candid dialogue focused on improving performance.