Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:13:48.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An evaluation of Hospice New Zealand's interprofessional fundamentals of palliative care program at a single site

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2014

Marcus Henning ,
Julie Hu ,
Craig Webster ,
Hadley Brown  and
Jo Murphy
Marcus Henning*
Affiliation:
Centre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Julie Hu
Affiliation:
Centre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Craig Webster
Affiliation:
Centre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Hadley Brown
Affiliation:
Business Development Manager, Mercy Hospice Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Jo Murphy
Affiliation:
Nurse Educator, Formerly Mercy Hospice Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Marcus Henning, Centre for Medical and Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, Room G17.1, 99 Grafton Road, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To study the efficacy of two modules within the Fundamentals of Palliative Care educational program within a single site. The modules included the concepts of Essence of Palliative Care and Pain and Symptom Management.

Method:

A mixed-methods approach incorporating questionnaires and interviews was implemented. Two phases were included. First, a purposive sample of 22 workshop participants were invited to fill out evaluation questionnaires on two occasions (immediately after the session and four weeks as follow-up). Second, semistructured interviews were conducted and interviews transcribed and analyzed using content analysis.

Results:

Participants felt they gained further knowledge in palliative patient management and refined their clinical practice. The questionnaire feedback revealed that the Essence of Palliative Care module provided a breadth of content but had difficulties in capturing the diverse needs of all attendees. The Pain and Symptom Management module was perceived as more technical and clinical, and this suited health professionals with an informed background. The interviewee feedback (three nurses, three nurse educators, one manager) suggested that the learning outcomes were comprehensive but needed to be more sensitive to learner needs. The teaching and learning activities were perceived as useful and encouraging. However, learners came from diverse contexts, and it was difficult to suit all learning preferences. Assessment and evaluation processes required more psychometric attention.

Significance of Results:

The piloting of the Fundamentals of Palliative Care program at this single site was of benefit and relevance to participants in their clinical practice. Overall, participants felt the course was useful to them and that they were able to gain valuable knowledge and skills. Several areas could be refined to optimize the learning, including: (1) knowing attendee learning potentialities and prior experiences, (2) considering a more inclusive and formal assessment process, (3) creating diverse mechanisms for disseminating knowledge and skills, and (4) improving methods of evaluation.

Keywords

HospicePalliative careInterprofessionalTraining and development
Type
Original Articles
Information
Palliative & Supportive Care , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , June 2015 , pp. 725 - 732
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bascand, G. (2012). Planning for the future: Structural change in New Zealand's population, labour force, and productivity. Paper presented at the Affording Our Future Conference, December 10, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347–364.Google Scholar
Biggs, J. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18, 57–75.Google Scholar
Contro, N.A., Larson, J., Scofield, S., et al. (2004). Hospital staff and family perspectives regarding quality of pediatric palliative care. Pediatrics, 114, 1248–1252.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2008). End of life care for all. Available from http://www.e-lfh.org.uk/projects/end-of-life-care/.Google Scholar
Department of Health and Ageing (2006). Guidelines for a palliative approach in residential aged care: Self-directed learning package—manual. Available from http://www.palliativecare.org.au/Portals/46/Guidelines%20for%20a%20palliative%20approach%20in%20residential%20aged%20care%20-%20guide.pdf.Google Scholar
Donaldson, S.I. & Grant-Vallone, E.J. (2002). Understanding self-report bias in organizational behavior research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 245–260.Google Scholar
Elo, S. & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107–115.Google Scholar
Ferguson, K.E. & Jinks, A.M. (1994). Integrating what is taught with what is practiced in the nursing curriculum: A multidimensional model. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20, 687–695.Google Scholar
Gillman, L., Adams, J., Watts, R., et al. (2012). Strategies to promote coping and resilience in oncology and palliative care nurses caring for adult patients with malignancy: A systematic review. The JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 10, S75–S90.Google Scholar
Guba, E.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Technology Research and Development, 29, 75–91.Google Scholar
Kember, D. & Leung, D.Y. (2008). Establishing the validity and reliability of course evaluation questionnaires. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 341–353.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, D. (1996). Great ideas revisited: Techniques for evaluating training programs. Revisiting Kirkpatrick's four-level model. Training and Development, 50, 54–59.Google Scholar
Kreber, C. & Cranton, P.A. (2000). Exploring the scholarship of teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 71, 476–495.Google Scholar
Ministry of Health (2001). The New Zealand palliative care strategy. Available from http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/life-stages/palliative-care/palliative-care-strategy-2001.Google Scholar
Osguthorpe, R.T. & Graham, C.R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4, 227–233.Google Scholar
Pan, C.X., Morrison, R.S., Meier, D.E., et al. (2001). How prevalent are hospital-based palliative care programs? Status report and future directions. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 4, 315–324.Google Scholar
Phillips, J.L., Piza, M. & Ingham, J. (2012). Continuing professional development programmes for rural nurses involved in palliative care delivery: An integrative review. Nurse Education Today, 32, 385–392.Google Scholar
Prideaux, D. (2003). ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Curriculum design. BMJ, 326, 268.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93.Google Scholar
Tuffrey-Wijne, I. (2002). The palliative care needs of people with intellectual disabilities: A case study. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 8, 222–232.Google Scholar
Tuffrey-Wijne, I. (2013). A new model for breaking bad news to people with intellectual disabilities. Palliative Medicine, 27, 5–12.Google Scholar
Vachon, M.L. (1995). Staff stress in hospice/palliative care: A review. Palliative Medicine, 9, 91–122.Google Scholar
van de Mortel, T.F. (2008). Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25, 40.Google Scholar
van der Vleuten, C., Schuwirth, L., Driessen, E., et al. (2012). A model for programmatic assessment fit for purpose. Medical Teacher, 34, 205–214.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, T.J., Wade, W.B. & Knock, L.D. (2009). A blueprint to assess professionalism: Results of a systematic review. Academic Medicine, 84, 551–558.Google Scholar