Hitting the target and missing the point? A BEME systematic review of evidence regarding the efficacy of statutory and mandatory training in health and care: BEME Guide No. 87

被引:0
|
作者
Ashley, Helen [1 ,6 ]
Gough, Suzanne [2 ]
Darlington, Carol [3 ]
Clark, Justin [4 ]
Mosley, Chiara [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manchester, People & Org Dev, Manchester, England
[2] Bond Univ, Fac Hlth Sci & Med, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia
[3] Mid Cheshire Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Emergency Med, Crewe, Cheshire, England
[4] Bond Univ, Inst Evidence Based Healthcare, Robina, Qld, Australia
[5] Mid Cheshire Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Workforce Transformat, Crewe, Cheshire, England
[6] Univ Manchester, Manchester, England
关键词
Best evidence medical education; methods; mandatory training; statutory training; STAFF; RESUSCITATION; PARTICIPATION; INDUCTION; OUTCOMES; DESIGN; IMPACT; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1080/0142159X.2024.2331048
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Background: Mandatory training is considered fundamental to establishing and maintaining high standards of professional practice. There is little evidence however, of the training either achieving its required learning outcomes, or delivering improvement in outcomes for patients. Whist organisations may be hitting their compliance target for mandatory training, is the purpose missing the point? This systematic review aims to synthesize and evaluate the efficacy of statutory and mandatory training. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, CNAHL, ERIC and Cochrane Central registers were searched on 23rd May 2023. All research designs were included and reported training had to specify an organisational mandate within a healthcare setting. Data was coded using a modified Kirkpatrick (KP) rating system. Critical appraisal was undertaken using the Modified Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Studies checklist and Mixed Methods Assessment Tool. Results: Twenty-five studies were included, featuring 9132 participants and 1348 patient cases audited. Studies described evaluation of mandatory training according to Kirkpatrick's outcomes levels 1-4b, with the majority (68%) undertaken in the UK and within acute settings. Training duration varied from 5 min to 3 days. There is a lack of consensus regarding mandatory training rationale, core topics, duration, and optimum refresher training period. Currently, mandatory training does not consistently translate to widescale improvements in safe practice or improved patient outcomes. Conclusions: Due to the lack of international consensus regarding the need for mandated training, most papers originated from countries with centrally administered national health care systems. The rationale for mandating training programmes remains undefined. The assumption that mandatory training is delivering safe practice outcomes is not supported by studies included in this review. The findings of this review offer a basis for further research to be undertaken to assist with the design, facilitation, and impact of mandatory training.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] Evidence regarding the utility of multiple mini-interview (MMI) for selection to undergraduate health programs: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 37
    Rees, Eliot L.
    Hawarden, Ashley W.
    Dent, Gordon
    Hays, Richard
    Bates, Joanna
    Hassell, Andrew B.
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2016, 38 (05) : 443 - 455
  • [2] Utility of selection methods for specialist medical training: A BEME (best evidence medical education) systematic review: BEME guide no. 45
    Roberts, Chris
    Khanna, Priya
    Rigby, Louise
    Bartle, Emma
    Llewellyn, Anthony
    Gustavs, Julie
    Newton, Libby
    Newcombe, James P.
    Davies, Mark
    Thistlethwaite, Jill
    Lynam, James
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2018, 40 (01) : 3 - 19
  • [3] The failure to fail underperforming trainees in health professions education: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 42
    Yepes-Rios, Monica
    Dudek, Nancy
    Duboyce, Rita
    Curtis, Jerri
    Allard, Rhonda J.
    Varpio, Lara
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2016, 38 (11) : 1092 - 1099
  • [4] Technology enhanced neuroanatomy teaching techniques: A focused BEME systematic review of current evidence: BEME Guide No. 75
    Newman, Hamish J.
    Meyer, Amanda J.
    Wilkinson, Tim J.
    Pather, Nalini
    Carr, Sandra E.
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2022, 44 (10) : 1069 - 1080
  • [5] A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9
    Hammick, M.
    Freeth, D.
    Koppel, I.
    Reeves, S.
    Barr, H.
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2007, 29 (08) : 735 - 751
  • [6] The effectiveness of case-based learning in health professional education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 23
    Thistlethwaite, Jill Elizabeth
    Davies, David
    Ekeocha, Samilia
    Kidd, Jane M.
    MacDougall, Colin
    Matthews, Paul
    Purkis, Judith
    Clay, Diane
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2012, 34 (06) : E421 - E444
  • [7] Teaching professionalism in medical education: A Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) systematic review. BEME Guide No. 25
    Birden, Hudson
    Glass, Nel
    Wilson, Ian
    Harrison, Michelle
    Usherwood, Tim
    Nass, Duncan
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2013, 35 (07) : E1252 - E1266
  • [8] What is the impact of structured resuscitation training on healthcare practitioners, their clients and the wider service? A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 20
    Mosley, Chiara
    Dewhurst, Christopher
    Molloy, Stephen
    Shaw, Ben Nigel
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2012, 34 (06) : E349 - E385
  • [9] Patient/service user involvement in medical education: A best evidence medical education (BEME) systematic review: BEME Guide No. 58
    Gordon, Morris
    Gupta, Simon
    Thornton, Debra
    Reid, Michael
    Mallen, Ernie
    Melling, Angela
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2020, 42 (01) : 4 - 16
  • [10] The effects of audience response systems on learning outcomes in health professions education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 21
    Nelson, Cody
    Hartling, Lisa
    Campbell, Sandra
    Oswald, Anna E.
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2012, 34 (06) : E386 - E405