Article Text

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
UK multisite evaluation of the impact of clinical educators in EDs from a learner’s perspective
  1. Muniswamy Hemavathi1,
  2. Chi Huynh2,
  3. Eloise Phillips2,
  4. Matthew Aiello3,
  5. Brian Kennedy1,
  6. Mike Clancy1,
  7. Wayne Hamer1,
  8. Graham Rutherford3,
  9. Aanika Khan3,
  10. David Terry2
  1. 1The Royal College of Emergency Medicine, London, UK
  2. 2Aston Pharmacy School, Aston University School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham, UK
  3. 3Health Education England, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr David Terry, Aston Pharmacy School, Aston University School of Life and Health Sciences, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK; d.terry{at}aston.ac.uk

Abstract

Background In England, demand for emergency care is increasing while there is also a staffing shortage. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM) suggested that appointment of senior doctors as clinical educators (CEs) would enable support and development of learners in EDs and improve retention and well-being. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of CEs in ED on learners.

Methods CEs were placed in 54 NHS Acute Trust EDs for a pilot beginning July 2018 and ending October 2020. Learners from multiple disciplines working at 54 NHS Acute Trust EDs where CEs were deployed were invited to complete an online survey designed to identify the impact of CEs in July of 2019, as part of an interim service evaluation.

Results Respondents numbered 493 from 49 of 54 study sites, including 286 (58%) medical (non-consultant) and 72 (14.6%) all other nursing, allied health professionals. 9 out of 10 learners reported having experienced a change to their learning as a result of the deployment of CEs in their department. 49.9% (246/493) reported that CEs had a positive impact on their well-being. 95% (340/358) reported an improved accessibility to undertaking clinical based assessments. 78% (281/358) perceived that access to CEs increased likelihood of passing assessments. Of those responding, 80.9% (399/493) reported they would remain/return to the same ED with a CE, and 92.5% (456/493) responded that they would prefer to go to a Trust with a CE.

Conclusions According to survey respondents, deployment of CEs across NHS Trusts has resulted in improvement and increased accessibility of learning and assessment opportunities for learners within ED. The impact of CEs on well-being is uncertain with half reporting improvement and the remaining half unsure. Further evaluation within the project will continue to explore the service benefit and workforce impact of the CEED intervention.

  • education
  • teaching
  • emergency care systems
  • emergency departments
  • emergency department
  • education
  • education
  • methods

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Handling editor David Metcalfe

  • Contributors MH, EP and MA contributed towards the conception and design of the study, drafting, revising and reviewing the manuscript for final approval. CH contributed towards the conception and design of the study, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of the data, drafting, revising and reviewing the manuscript for final approval. BK, MC and WH contributed towards the conception and design of the study, and reviewing the final manuscript for final approval. GR and AK contributed towards the conception and design of the study and the acquisition of the data and reviewing the manuscript for final approval. DT contributed towards the conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data, revising and reviewing the manuscript for final approval.

  • Funding This study was funded by Health Education England Commissioned study.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.