Choosing Not to Reinvent the Wheel: Creating a Combined Annual Education and Competencies Review

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/162664
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Choosing Not to Reinvent the Wheel: Creating a Combined Annual Education and Competencies Review
Abstract:
Choosing Not to Reinvent the Wheel: Creating a Combined Annual Education and Competencies Review
Conference Sponsor:Emergency Nurses Association
Conference Year:2007
Author:Myers, Kevin, RN, BSN, NREMT-P
P.I. Institution Name:Saint Luke's Hospital
Title:Clinical Educator Emergency Department
Contact Address:4401 Wornall, Kansas City, MO, 64111, USA
Contact Telephone:(816) 932-8218
[Clinical Poster] Clinical Topic: The development of annual competency reviews and continuing education for emergency department (ED) staff can be a complicated, time-consuming, and expensive process. Securing qualified staff, equipment, and resources alone can strain any emergency department. In health care systems with multiple emergency departments, such challenges are compounded, as each emergency department must create its own program every year. To eliminate duplication of efforts, ED management at this 9-hospital Midwest health care system spearheaded the development of a single, joint competency review/education program for the system's four primary emergency departments' a Level I trauma center and three outlying tertiary level emergency department. This abstract describes the development of and benefits to a multi-hospital system of a consolidated annual review continuing education program.

Implementation: With feasibility of the program established by ED managers, an education committee of ED staff from each campus was formed in early 2006 to develop the content. Together with ED managers, the committee drafted mandatory competencies, accreditation requirements, and special competencies requested by system managers. The committee also developed a self-study/test booklet to aid participants in preparing for the review, which they could refer to at the review session. Morning and afternoon sessions were offered over a four-day period at a neutral site classroom, located centrally within the hospital system. Review stations, set up the day before and manned by ED staff, covered pre-planned teaching points with participants. Educational sessions were led by the system's ED managers, members of the education committee, volunteer staff, and the clinical educator. Upon completion of the program, participants were asked to complete a survey (anonymity optional) to determine the efficacy of the competency review. Surveys, available on individual units and by email, were classified into two categories: "greater than" or "less than three years of experience" and measured 12 items on a 5-point scale, ranging from strongly agree to disagree. Items rated 4.0 to 5.0 identified aspects of the program that contributed to its success, while items receiving < 3.5 identified those that did not. Scores, trends, and comments from participants were compiled by the clinical educator and ED managers. Expense calculations determined the individual cost per employee. ED unit managers met to determine the practicability of implementing the new approach for future reviews.

Outcomes: In October 2006, 200 registered nurses and emergency care technicians from four emergency departments came together under one roof to complete the system's first joint competency review/education program. By every measure, the program was a success. Multiple days and a choice of morning or afternoon session provided a flexible schedule for day and night shift staff to make arrangements to attend. Combining staff meant no one individual emergency department experienced staffing shortages nor did any single staff member feel stressed trying to plan and complete annual reviews for his/her emergency department. A neutral site eliminated interference with ED operations and equipment depletion. The combined effort enhanced resource availability. Instead of having one or two staff members develop and work a review station, the joint program averaged 10 staff members on any given day, allowing more expert staff to participate, such as physicians. Participants felt the program met their needs (4.54) and they would support future joint programs (4.31). Staff with less than three years of experience felt they received sufficient depth of learning at skills stations (4.15) and received reinforcement on low-volume opportunities (4.54). Those with more than three years of experience said the skills stations gave them new information (4.15), reinforced low-volume opportunities (4.38), would help in patient care (4.42), and provided a successful, organized learning environment (4.37). Through this joint venture we discovered that the emergency departments had been using different forms and equipment for the same procedures (e.g., sager/hare for femur traction) and following different policies. These discrepancies were corrected to increase continuity of care across all emergency departments. The total cost per employee for the combined program was $45.00 versus $75.00 previously, for a savings of $30.00 per employee.

Recommendations: A consolidated program minimizes financial and time expenditures, while maximizing resources and learning experiences. Gathering staff in a single location can reveal opportunities for improving the operation of all system emergency departments, and ultimately the care of all ED patients.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Emergency Nurses Association

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleChoosing Not to Reinvent the Wheel: Creating a Combined Annual Education and Competencies Reviewen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/162664-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Choosing Not to Reinvent the Wheel: Creating a Combined Annual Education and Competencies Review</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Emergency Nurses Association</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2007</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Myers, Kevin, RN, BSN, NREMT-P</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Saint Luke's Hospital</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Clinical Educator Emergency Department</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">4401 Wornall, Kansas City, MO, 64111, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">(816) 932-8218</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">klmyers@saint-lukes.org</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">[Clinical Poster] Clinical Topic: The development of annual competency reviews and continuing education for emergency department (ED) staff can be a complicated, time-consuming, and expensive process. Securing qualified staff, equipment, and resources alone can strain any emergency department. In health care systems with multiple emergency departments, such challenges are compounded, as each emergency department must create its own program every year. To eliminate duplication of efforts, ED management at this 9-hospital Midwest health care system spearheaded the development of a single, joint competency review/education program for the system's four primary emergency departments' a Level I trauma center and three outlying tertiary level emergency department. This abstract describes the development of and benefits to a multi-hospital system of a consolidated annual review continuing education program.<br/><br/>Implementation: With feasibility of the program established by ED managers, an education committee of ED staff from each campus was formed in early 2006 to develop the content. Together with ED managers, the committee drafted mandatory competencies, accreditation requirements, and special competencies requested by system managers. The committee also developed a self-study/test booklet to aid participants in preparing for the review, which they could refer to at the review session. Morning and afternoon sessions were offered over a four-day period at a neutral site classroom, located centrally within the hospital system. Review stations, set up the day before and manned by ED staff, covered pre-planned teaching points with participants. Educational sessions were led by the system's ED managers, members of the education committee, volunteer staff, and the clinical educator. Upon completion of the program, participants were asked to complete a survey (anonymity optional) to determine the efficacy of the competency review. Surveys, available on individual units and by email, were classified into two categories: &quot;greater than&quot; or &quot;less than three years of experience&quot; and measured 12 items on a 5-point scale, ranging from strongly agree to disagree. Items rated 4.0 to 5.0 identified aspects of the program that contributed to its success, while items receiving &lt; 3.5 identified those that did not. Scores, trends, and comments from participants were compiled by the clinical educator and ED managers. Expense calculations determined the individual cost per employee. ED unit managers met to determine the practicability of implementing the new approach for future reviews.<br/><br/>Outcomes: In October 2006, 200 registered nurses and emergency care technicians from four emergency departments came together under one roof to complete the system's first joint competency review/education program. By every measure, the program was a success. Multiple days and a choice of morning or afternoon session provided a flexible schedule for day and night shift staff to make arrangements to attend. Combining staff meant no one individual emergency department experienced staffing shortages nor did any single staff member feel stressed trying to plan and complete annual reviews for his/her emergency department. A neutral site eliminated interference with ED operations and equipment depletion. The combined effort enhanced resource availability. Instead of having one or two staff members develop and work a review station, the joint program averaged 10 staff members on any given day, allowing more expert staff to participate, such as physicians. Participants felt the program met their needs (4.54) and they would support future joint programs (4.31). Staff with less than three years of experience felt they received sufficient depth of learning at skills stations (4.15) and received reinforcement on low-volume opportunities (4.54). Those with more than three years of experience said the skills stations gave them new information (4.15), reinforced low-volume opportunities (4.38), would help in patient care (4.42), and provided a successful, organized learning environment (4.37). Through this joint venture we discovered that the emergency departments had been using different forms and equipment for the same procedures (e.g., sager/hare for femur traction) and following different policies. These discrepancies were corrected to increase continuity of care across all emergency departments. The total cost per employee for the combined program was $45.00 versus $75.00 previously, for a savings of $30.00 per employee.<br/><br/>Recommendations: A consolidated program minimizes financial and time expenditures, while maximizing resources and learning experiences. Gathering staff in a single location can reveal opportunities for improving the operation of all system emergency departments, and ultimately the care of all ED patients.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T10:32:03Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T10:32:03Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipEmergency Nurses Associationen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.