Evaluation of Sustained Improvement in Trauma Education Approaches for the College of Emergency Nursing Australasia Trauma Nursing Program

Authors: Pauline Calleja, Brooke Alexander

Abstract:

In 2010 the College of Emergency Nursing Australasia (CENA) undertook sole administration of the Trauma Nursing Program (TNP) across Australia. The original TNP was developed from recommendations by the Review of Trauma and Emergency Services-Victoria. While participant and faculty feedback about the program was positive, issues were identified that were common for industry training programs in Australia. These issues included didactic approaches, with many lectures and little interaction/activity for participants. Participants were not necessarily encouraged to undertake deep learning due to the teaching and learning principles underpinning the course, and thus participants described having to learn by rote, and only gain a surface understanding of principles that were not always applied to their working context. In Australia, a trauma or emergency nurse may work in variable contexts that impact on practice, especially where resources influence scope and capacity of hospitals to provide trauma care. In 2011, a program review was undertaken resulting in major changes to the curriculum, teaching, learning and assessment approaches. The aim was to improve learning including a greater emphasis on pre-program preparation for participants, the learning environment and clinically applicable contextualized outcomes participants experienced. Previously if participants wished to undertake assessment, they were given a take home examination. The assessment had poor uptake and return, and provided no rigor since assessment was not invigilated. A new assessment structure was enacted with an invigilated examination during course hours. These changes were implemented in early 2012 with great improvement in both faculty and participant satisfaction. This presentation reports on a comparison of participant evaluations collected from courses post implementation in 2012 and in 2015 to evaluate if positive changes were sustained. Methods: Descriptive statistics were applied in analyzing evaluations. Since all questions had more than 20% of cells with a count of <5, Fisher’s Exact Test was used to identify significance (p = <0.05) between groups. Results: A total of fourteen group evaluations were included in this analysis, seven CENA TNP groups from 2012 and seven from 2015 (randomly chosen). A total of 173 participant evaluations were collated (n = 81 from 2012 and 92 from 2015). All course evaluations were anonymous, and nine of the original 14 questions were applicable for this evaluation. All questions were rated by participants on a five-point Likert scale. While all items showed improvement from 2012 to 2015, significant improvement was noted in two items. These were in regard to the content being delivered in a way that met participant learning needs and satisfaction with the length and pace of the program. Evaluation of written comments supports these results. Discussion: The aim of redeveloping the CENA TNP was to improve learning and satisfaction for participants. These results demonstrate that initial improvements in 2012 were able to be maintained and in two essential areas significantly improved. Changes that increased participant engagement, support and contextualization of course materials were essential for CENA TNP evolution.

Keywords: emergency nursing education, industry training programs, teaching and learning, trauma education