Reflections on the development of a dynamic learning, teaching and assessment strategy.

Developing learning, teaching and assessment strategies that foster ongoing engagement and provide inspiration to academic staff is a particular challenge. This paper demonstrates how an institutional learning, teaching and assessment strategy was developed and a ‘dynamic’ strategy created in order to achieve the ongoing enhancement of the quality of the student learning experience. The authors use the discussion of the evolution, development and launch of the Strategy and underpinning Resource Bank to reflect on the hopes and intentions behind the approach; firstly the paper will discuss the collaborative and iterative approach taken to the development of an institutional learning, teaching and assessment strategy; and secondly, the development of open access educational resources to underpin the strategy. The paper then outlines staff engagement with the resource bank and positive outcomes which have been identified to date, identifies the next steps in achieving the ambition behind the strategy and outlines the action research and fuller evaluation which will be used to monitor progress and ensure responsive learning at institutional level.

A module-based approach to foster and document the intercultural process before and during the residence abroad.

This article contributes to the debate on what form of preparation and support can enhance the intercultural student experience during the Year Abroad. It presents a credit-bearing and multi-modal module at a UK university designed to both prepare students prior to departure through a series of workshops and activities on an e-portfolio and help them engage in meta-reflection on intercultural issues during their stay. The presentation of the curricular components of the course and instances extracted from student blogs are contextualised within theoretical considerations on intercultural education and a holistic approach to student development. The longitudinal evolution of the module is presented in the context of an iterative approach leading to a cycle of revisions and amendments. With its pragmatic stance this article aims to address one of the concerns recently expressed about intercultural education, namely that although intercultural theories are suitably incorporated in the latest thinking on communicative competence, there is a lack of evidence-based practice.

Development of process control methodology for tracking the quality and safety of pain, agitation and sedation management in critical care units

Objective: To develop sedation, pain, and agitation quality measures using process control methodology and evaluate their properties in clinical practice. Design: A Sedation Quality Assessment Tool was developed and validated to capture data for 12-hour periods of nursing care. Domains included pain/discomfort and sedation-agitation behaviors; sedative, analgesic, and neuromuscular blocking drug administration; ventilation status; and conditions potentially justifying deep sedation. Predefined sedation-related adverse events were recorded daily. Using an iterative process, algorithms were developed to describe the proportion of care periods with poor limb relaxation, poor ventilator synchronization, unnecessary deep sedation, agitation, and an overall optimum sedation metric. Proportion charts described processes over time (2 monthly intervals) for each ICU. The numbers of patients treated between sedation-related adverse events were described with G charts. Automated algorithms generated charts for 12 months of sequential data. Mean values for each process were calculated, and variation within and between ICUs explored qualitatively. Setting: Eight Scottish ICUs over a 12-month period. Patients: Mechanically ventilated patients. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The Sedation Quality Assessment Tool agitation-sedation domains correlated with the Richmond Sedation Agitation Scale score (Spearman [rho] = 0.75) and were reliable in clinician-clinician (weighted kappa; [kappa] = 0.66) and clinician-researcher ([kappa] = 0.82) comparisons. The limb movement domain had fair correlation with Behavioral Pain Scale ([rho] = 0.24) and was reliable in clinician-clinician ([kappa] = 0.58) and clinician-researcher ([kappa] = 0.45) comparisons. Ventilator synchronization correlated with Behavioral Pain Scale ([rho] = 0.54), and reliability in clinician-clinician ([kappa] = 0.29) and clinician-researcher ([kappa] = 0.42) comparisons was fair-moderate. Eight hundred twenty-five patients were enrolled (range, 59-235 across ICUs), providing 12,385 care periods for evaluation (range 655-3,481 across ICUs). The mean proportion of care periods with each quality metric varied between ICUs: excessive sedation 12-38%; agitation 4-17%; poor relaxation 13-21%; poor ventilator synchronization 8-17%; and overall optimum sedation 45-70%. Mean adverse event intervals ranged from 1.5 to 10.3 patients treated. The quality measures appeared relatively stable during the observation period. Conclusions: Process control methodology can be used to simultaneously monitor multiple aspects of pain-sedation-agitation management within ICUs. Variation within and between ICUs could be used as triggers to explore practice variation, improve quality, and monitor this over time