E-learning in transfusion medicine: An exploratory qualitative assessment.

E‐learning online education transfusion

Journal

Vox sanguinis
ISSN: 1423-0410
Titre abrégé: Vox Sang
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0413606

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 May 2024
Historique:
revised: 30 04 2024
received: 03 01 2024
accepted: 04 05 2024
medline: 21 5 2024
pubmed: 21 5 2024
entrez: 21 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

E-learning programmes are increasingly offered in transfusion medicine (TM) education. The aim of this study was to explore facilitators and barriers to TM e-learning programmes, including assessment of learning outcomes and measures of effectiveness. Participants selected from a prior survey and representing a diverse number of international e-learning programmes were invited to participate. A mixed methodology was employed, combining a survey and individual semi-structured one-on-one interviews. Interview data were analysed inductively to explore programme development, evaluation, and facilitators and barriers to implementation. Fourteen participants representing 13 institutions participated in the survey and 10 were interviewed. The e-learning programmes have been in use for a variable duration between 5 and 16 years. Funding sources varied, including government and institutional support. Learner assessment methods varied and encompassed multiple-choice-questions (n = 12), direct observation (n = 4) and competency assessment (n = 4). Most regional and national blood collection agencies rely on user feedback and short-term learning assessments to evaluate their programmes. Only one respondent indicated an attempt to correlate e-learning with clinical practices. Factors that facilitated programme implementation included support from management and external audits to ensure compliance with regulatory educational and training requirements. Barriers to programme implementation included the allocation of staff time for in-house development, enforcing compliance, keeping educational content up-to-date and gaining access to outcome data for educational providers. There is evidence of considerable diversity in the evaluation of e-learning programmes. Further work is needed to understand the ultimate impact of TM e-learning on transfusion practices and patient outcomes.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
E-learning programmes are increasingly offered in transfusion medicine (TM) education. The aim of this study was to explore facilitators and barriers to TM e-learning programmes, including assessment of learning outcomes and measures of effectiveness.
MATERIALS AND METHODS METHODS
Participants selected from a prior survey and representing a diverse number of international e-learning programmes were invited to participate. A mixed methodology was employed, combining a survey and individual semi-structured one-on-one interviews. Interview data were analysed inductively to explore programme development, evaluation, and facilitators and barriers to implementation.
RESULTS RESULTS
Fourteen participants representing 13 institutions participated in the survey and 10 were interviewed. The e-learning programmes have been in use for a variable duration between 5 and 16 years. Funding sources varied, including government and institutional support. Learner assessment methods varied and encompassed multiple-choice-questions (n = 12), direct observation (n = 4) and competency assessment (n = 4). Most regional and national blood collection agencies rely on user feedback and short-term learning assessments to evaluate their programmes. Only one respondent indicated an attempt to correlate e-learning with clinical practices. Factors that facilitated programme implementation included support from management and external audits to ensure compliance with regulatory educational and training requirements. Barriers to programme implementation included the allocation of staff time for in-house development, enforcing compliance, keeping educational content up-to-date and gaining access to outcome data for educational providers.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence of considerable diversity in the evaluation of e-learning programmes. Further work is needed to understand the ultimate impact of TM e-learning on transfusion practices and patient outcomes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38769720
doi: 10.1111/vox.13682
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : International Society of Blood Transfusion

Informations de copyright

© 2024 International Society of Blood Transfusion.

Références

Tudor Car L, Soong A, Kyaw BM, Chua KL, Low‐Beer N, Majeed A. Health professions digital education on clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review by digital health education collaboration. BMC Med. 2019;17:139.
Al‐Riyami AZ, Peterson D, Vanden Broeck J, Das S, Saxon B, Lin Y, et al. E‐learning/online education in transfusion medicine: a cross‐sectional international survey. Transfus Med. 2022;32:499–504.
Al‐Riyami AZ, Vanden Broeck J, Rahimi‐Levene N, Das S, Saxon B, Lin Y, et al. E‐learning in transfusion medicine: a scoping review. Transfusion. 2023;63:2362–2376.
Kirkpatrick JD, Kirkpatrick WK. Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation. 1st ed. Alexandria, VA: Association for Talent Development; 2016.
Kirkpatrick D, Kirkpatrick J. Evaluating training programs: the four levels. 3rd ed. San Francisco, Oakland, CA: Berrett‐Koehler Publishers; 2006.
E‐learning methodologies. A guide for designing and developing e‐learning courses. Germany: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Available from: https://www.fao.org/3/i2516e/i2516e.pdf. Last accessed 25 Oct 2023.
Miner J. Implementing E‐learning to enhance the management of postpartum hemorrhage. Nurs Womens Health. 2020;24:421–430.
Kelly SL, Reed MJ, Innes CJ, Manson L. A review of blood component usage in a large UK emergency department after implementation of simple measures. Emerg Med J. 2013;30:842–845.
Brunetta DM, Carvalho L, Barbosa S, Santos F, Barroso K, Carneiro‐Silva F, et al. The use of social media as a tool for patient blood management and transfusion medicine education. Vox Sang. 2022;117:520–525.
Lee TC, Murray J, McDonald EG. An online educational module on transfusion safety and appropriateness for resident physicians: a controlled before‐after quality‐improvement study. CMAJ Open. 2019;7:E492–E496.
Regmi K, Jones L. A systematic review of the factors—enablers and barriers—affecting e‐learning in health sciences education. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20:91.
Bates R. A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Eval Program Plan. 2004;27:341–347.
Islam R, Tinmouth AT, Francis JJ, Brehaut JC, Born J, Stockton C, et al. A cross‐country comparison of intensive care physicians' beliefs about their transfusion behaviour: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Implement Sci. 2012;7:93.
Soril LJJ, Noseworthy TW, Stelfox HT, Zygun DA, Clement FM. Facilitators of and barriers to adopting a restrictive red blood cell transfusion practice: a population‐based cross‐sectional survey. CMAJ Open. 2019;7:E252–E257.
Meinert E, Eerens J, Banks C, Maloney S, Rivers G, Ilic D, et al. Exploring the cost of eLearning in health professions education: scoping review. JMIR Med Educ. 2021;7:e13681.
Barteit S, Guzek D, Jahn A, Bärnighausen T, Jorge MM, Neuhann F. Evaluation of e‐learning for medical education in low‐ and middle‐income countries: a systematic review. Comput Educ. 2020;145:103726.

Auteurs

Arwa Z Al-Riyami (AZ)

Department of Haematology, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, University Medical City, Muscat, Oman.

Kyle Jensen (K)

Research and Development, Australian Red Cross Lifeblood, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Cynthia So-Osman (C)

Unit Transfusion Medicine, Sanquin Blood Supply Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Haematology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Ben Saxon (B)

Department of Haematology/Oncology, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.

Naomi Rahimi-Levene (N)

Blood Bank, Shamir Medical Center, Zerifin, Adelson School of Medicine, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.

Soumya Das (S)

Department of Transfusion Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Nagpur, India.

Simon J Stanworth (SJ)

NHSBT/Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust/University of Oxford and ICTMG, Oxford, UK.

Yulia Lin (Y)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, University of Toronto Quality in Utilization, Education and Safety in Transfusion (QUEST) Research Program, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Classifications MeSH