Optimising frontline learning and engagement between consultant-led neonatal teams in the West Midlands: a survey on the utility of an augmented simulation training technique.

Consultant training Neonatal networking Neonatal unit designation Neonatology Networks

Journal

Advances in simulation (London, England)
ISSN: 2059-0628
Titre abrégé: Adv Simul (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101700425

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 Aug 2021
Historique:
received: 21 04 2021
accepted: 19 08 2021
entrez: 29 8 2021
pubmed: 30 8 2021
medline: 30 8 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

In England, neonatal care is delivered in operational delivery networks, comprising a combination of the Neonatal Intensive Care (NICU), Local-Neonatal (LNU) or Special-Care Units (SCU), based on their ability to care for babies with different degrees of illness or prematurity. With the development of network care pathways, the most premature and sickest are mostly triaged for delivery in services linked to NICU. This has created anxiety for teams in LNU and SCU. Less exposure to sicker babies has resulted in limited opportunities to maintain expertise for when these babies unexpectedly deliver at their centre and thereafter require transfer for care, to NICU. Simultaneously, LNU and SCU teams develop skills in the care of the less ill and premature baby which would also be of benefit to NICU teams. A need for mutual learning through inter-unit multidirectional collaborative learning and engagement (hereafter also called neonatal networking) between teams of different designations emerged. Here, neonatal networking is defined as collaboration, shared clinical learning and developing an understanding of local systems strengths and challenges between units of different and similar designations. We describe the responses to the development of a clinical and systems focussed platform for this engagement between different teams within our neonatal ODN. An interactive 1-day programme was developed in the West Midlands, focussing on a non-hierarchical, equal partnership between neonatal teams from different unit designations. It utilised simulation around clinical scenarios, with a slant towards consultant engagement. Four groups rotating through four clinical simulation scenarios were developed. Each group participated in a clinical simulation scenario, led by a consultant and supported by nurses and doctors in training together with facilitators, with a further ~two consultants, as observers within the group. All were considered learners. Consultant candidates took turns to be participants and observers in the simulation scenarios so that at the end of the day all had led a scenario. Each simulation-clinical debrief session was lengthened by a further ~ 20 min, during which freestyle discussion with all learners occurred. This was to promote further bonding, through multidirectional sharing, and with a systems focus on understanding the strengths and challenges of practices in different units. A consultant focus was adopted to promote a long-term engagement between units around shared care. There were four time points for this neonatal networking during the course of the day. Qualitative assessment and a Likert scale were used to assess this initiative over 4 years. One hundred fifty-five individuals involved in frontline neonatal care participated. Seventy-seven were consultants, supported by neonatal trainees, staff grade doctors, clinical fellows, advanced neonatal nurse practitioners and nurses in training. All were invited to participate in the survey. The survey response rate was 80.6%. Seventy-nine percent felt that this learning strategy was highly relevant; 96% agreed that for consultants this was appropriate adult learning. Ninety-eight percent agreed that consultant training encompassed more than bedside clinical management, including forging communication links between teams. Thematic responses suggested that this was a highly useful method for multi-directional learning around shared care between neonatal units. Simulation, enhanced with systems focussed debrief, appeared to be an acceptable method of promoting multidirectional learning within neonatal teams of differing designations within the WMNODN.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
In England, neonatal care is delivered in operational delivery networks, comprising a combination of the Neonatal Intensive Care (NICU), Local-Neonatal (LNU) or Special-Care Units (SCU), based on their ability to care for babies with different degrees of illness or prematurity. With the development of network care pathways, the most premature and sickest are mostly triaged for delivery in services linked to NICU. This has created anxiety for teams in LNU and SCU. Less exposure to sicker babies has resulted in limited opportunities to maintain expertise for when these babies unexpectedly deliver at their centre and thereafter require transfer for care, to NICU. Simultaneously, LNU and SCU teams develop skills in the care of the less ill and premature baby which would also be of benefit to NICU teams. A need for mutual learning through inter-unit multidirectional collaborative learning and engagement (hereafter also called neonatal networking) between teams of different designations emerged. Here, neonatal networking is defined as collaboration, shared clinical learning and developing an understanding of local systems strengths and challenges between units of different and similar designations. We describe the responses to the development of a clinical and systems focussed platform for this engagement between different teams within our neonatal ODN.
METHOD METHODS
An interactive 1-day programme was developed in the West Midlands, focussing on a non-hierarchical, equal partnership between neonatal teams from different unit designations. It utilised simulation around clinical scenarios, with a slant towards consultant engagement. Four groups rotating through four clinical simulation scenarios were developed. Each group participated in a clinical simulation scenario, led by a consultant and supported by nurses and doctors in training together with facilitators, with a further ~two consultants, as observers within the group. All were considered learners. Consultant candidates took turns to be participants and observers in the simulation scenarios so that at the end of the day all had led a scenario. Each simulation-clinical debrief session was lengthened by a further ~ 20 min, during which freestyle discussion with all learners occurred. This was to promote further bonding, through multidirectional sharing, and with a systems focus on understanding the strengths and challenges of practices in different units. A consultant focus was adopted to promote a long-term engagement between units around shared care. There were four time points for this neonatal networking during the course of the day. Qualitative assessment and a Likert scale were used to assess this initiative over 4 years.
RESULTS RESULTS
One hundred fifty-five individuals involved in frontline neonatal care participated. Seventy-seven were consultants, supported by neonatal trainees, staff grade doctors, clinical fellows, advanced neonatal nurse practitioners and nurses in training. All were invited to participate in the survey. The survey response rate was 80.6%. Seventy-nine percent felt that this learning strategy was highly relevant; 96% agreed that for consultants this was appropriate adult learning. Ninety-eight percent agreed that consultant training encompassed more than bedside clinical management, including forging communication links between teams. Thematic responses suggested that this was a highly useful method for multi-directional learning around shared care between neonatal units.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Simulation, enhanced with systems focussed debrief, appeared to be an acceptable method of promoting multidirectional learning within neonatal teams of differing designations within the WMNODN.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34454614
doi: 10.1186/s41077-021-00181-1
pii: 10.1186/s41077-021-00181-1
pmc: PMC8401370
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

29

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s).

Références

BMJ Open Qual. 2021 May;10(2):
pubmed: 34049867
Simul Healthc. 2015 Apr;10(2):106-15
pubmed: 25710312
Adv Simul (Lond). 2021 Mar 4;6(1):6
pubmed: 33663603
Adv Simul (Lond). 2017 Oct 19;2:20
pubmed: 29450021
Simul Healthc. 2019 Oct;14(5):333-342
pubmed: 31135684
Adv Simul (Lond). 2019 May 21;4:10
pubmed: 31139436

Auteurs

Thillagavathie Pillay (T)

University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK. tilly.pillay@uhl-tr.nhs.uk.
Faculty of Science and Engineering, RIHS, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK. tilly.pillay@uhl-tr.nhs.uk.
College of Life Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. tilly.pillay@uhl-tr.nhs.uk.

Lynsey Clarke (L)

West Midlands Neonatal Operational Delivery Network, Solihull, UK.
University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.

Lee Abbott (L)

University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Keele, Keele, UK.

Pinki Surana (P)

University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.

Asha Shenvi (A)

University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.

Sanjeev Deshpande (S)

Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, Shrewsbury, UK.

Joanne Cookson (J)

University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Keele, Keele, UK.

Matthew Nash (M)

Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.

Joe Fawke (J)

University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.

Vishna Rasiah (V)

Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.

Jonathan Cusack (J)

University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
College of Life Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

Classifications MeSH