A 'before and after' study of nursing students' self-assessed competence in identifying the needs of older patients in hospital using an educational workbook.

Background: A core component of nurse education is clinical practice in order to support the development of clinical skills and competence. Assessment and measurement of the clinical competence of nursing students is important to gauge their professional development and educational needs.

Aim: To evaluate the impact of an Older Persons’ Assessment Educational Workbook (OPAEW) and explore second year nursing students’ competence and their opinions and use of the workbook.

Methods: A ‘before and after’ pre-experimental design was undertaken with n=6 second year nursing students. Outcome measures were the Nursing Competencies Questionnaire and the Self-efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale. Content analysis of workbooks and a survey (n=5) of opinions regarding the workbook was undertaken.

Findings: Pre and post test results for the study (n=5) were tested to determine if there was a relationship between changes in the NCQ and SECP repeated measures and use of an OPAEW. Testing identified evidence of a statistically significant difference for both SECP measures (SECP28 p=0.043; SECP7 p=0.042), with no clear statistical evidence of a difference for the NCQ (p=0.08). A weak negative association (NCQ ρ=-0.600 p=0.285; SECP28 ρ=-0.300 p=0.624; SECP7 ρ=-0.205 p=0.741), was found indicating that those participants who scored the lowest scores at the start of the study, benefited most from the workbook.

Content analysis of the OPAEW (n=5) found that 3 of the 5 participants completed all components of the workbook, with a mean of 1051 words used (SD 281.8). Through the survey (n=5) students reported the workbook as a useful guide when undertaking a patient assessment.

Conclusions: The OPAEW showed potential as an intervention to support the development of nursing students’ competence in older person assessment skills.

A 'before and after' study of nursing students' self-assessed competence in identifying the needs of older patients in hospital using an educational workbook.

Background: A core component of nurse education is clinical practice in order to support the development of clinical skills and competence. Assessment and measurement of the clinical competence of nursing students is important to gauge their professional development and educational needs.

Aim: To evaluate the impact of an Older Persons’ Assessment Educational Workbook (OPAEW) and explore second year nursing students’ competence and their opinions and use of the workbook.

Methods: A ‘before and after’ pre-experimental design was undertaken with n=6 second year nursing students. Outcome measures were the Nursing Competencies Questionnaire and the Self-efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale. Content analysis of workbooks and a survey (n=5) of opinions regarding the workbook was undertaken.

Findings: Pre and post test results for the study (n=5) were tested to determine if there was a relationship between changes in the NCQ and SECP repeated measures and use of an OPAEW. Testing identified evidence of a statistically significant difference for both SECP measures (SECP28 p=0.043; SECP7 p=0.042), with no clear statistical evidence of a difference for the NCQ (p=0.08). A weak negative association (NCQ ρ=-0.600 p=0.285; SECP28 ρ=-0.300 p=0.624; SECP7 ρ=-0.205 p=0.741), was found indicating that those participants who scored the lowest scores at the start of the study, benefited most from the workbook.

Content analysis of the OPAEW (n=5) found that 3 of the 5 participants completed all components of the workbook, with a mean of 1051 words used (SD 281.8). Through the survey (n=5) students reported the workbook as a useful guide when undertaking a patient assessment.

Conclusions: The OPAEW showed potential as an intervention to support the development of nursing students’ competence in older person assessment skills.

External quality assessment of BRAF molecular analysis in melanoma

The availability of BRAF inhibitors has given metastatic melanoma patients an effective new treatment choice and molecular testing to determine the presence or absence of a BRAF codon 600 mutation is pivotal in the clinical management of these patients. This molecular test must be performed accurately and appropriately to ensure that the patient receives the most suitable treatment in a timely manner. Laboratories have introduced such testing; however, some experience low sample throughput making it critical that an external quality assurance programme is available to help promote a high standard of testing, reporting and provide an educational aspect for BRAF molecular testing. Laboratories took part in three rounds of external quality assessment (EQA) during a 12-month period giving participants a measure of the accuracy of genotyping, clinical interpretation of the result and experience in testing a range of different samples. Formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue sections from malignant melanoma patients were distributed to participants for BRAF molecular testing. The standard of testing was generally high but distribution of a mutation other than the most common, p.(Val600Glu), highlighted concerns with detection or reporting of the presence of rarer mutations. The main issues raised in the interpretation of the results were the importance of clear unambiguous interpretation of the result tailored to the patient and the understanding that the treatment is different from that given to other stratified medicine programmes. The variability in reporting and wide range of methodologies used indicate a continuing need for EQA in this field.

Patient-reported quality-of-life analysis of radium-223 dichloride from the phase III ALSYMPCA study

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223), a first-in-class α-emitting radiopharmaceutical, is recommended in both pre- and post-docetaxel settings in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and symptomatic bone metastases based on overall survival benefit demonstrated in the phase III ALSYMPCA study. ALSYMPCA included prospective measurements of health-related quality of life (QOL) using two validated instruments: the general EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) and the disease-specific Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P).

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analyses were conducted to determine treatment effects of radium-223 plus standard of care (SOC) versus placebo plus SOC on QOL using FACT-P and EQ-5D. Outcomes assessed were percentage of patients experiencing improvement, percentage of patients experiencing worsening, and mean QOL scores during the study.

RESULTS: Analyses were carried out on the intent-to-treat population of patients randomized to receive radium-223 (n = 614) or placebo (n = 307). The mean baseline EQ-5D utility and FACT-P total scores were similar between treatment groups. A significantly higher percentage of patients receiving radium-223 experienced meaningful improvement in EQ-5D utility score on treatment versus placebo {29.2% versus 18.5%, respectively; P = 0.004; odds ratio (OR) = 1.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-2.74]}. Findings were similar for FACT-P total score [24.6% versus 16.1%, respectively; P = 0.020; OR = 1.70 (95% CI 1.08-2.65)]. A lower percentage of patients receiving radium-223 experienced meaningful worsening versus placebo measured by EQ-5D utility score and FACT-P total score. Prior docetaxel use and current bisphosphonate use did not affect these findings. Treatment was a significant predictor of EQ-5D utility score, with radium-223 associated with higher scores versus placebo (0.56 versus 0.50, respectively; P = 0.002). Findings were similar for FACT-P total score (99.08 versus 95.22, respectively; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS: QOL data from ALSYMPCA demonstrated that improved survival with radium-223 is accompanied by significant QOL benefits, including a higher percentage of patients with meaningful QOL improvement and a slower decline in QOL over time in patients with CRPC.

Situation Background Assessment Recommendation (SBAR): Undergraduate Perspectives

Situation Background Assessment and Recommendation (SBAR): Undergraduate Perspectives C Morgan, L Adams, J Murray, R Dunlop, IK Walsh. Ian K Walsh, Centre for Medical Education, Queen’s University Belfast, Mulhouse Building, Royal Victoria Hospital, Grosvenor Road, Belfast BT12 6DP Background and Purpose: Structured communication tools are used to improve team communication quality.1,2 The Situation Background Assessment and Recommendation (SBAR) tool is widely adopted within patient safety.3 SBAR effectiveness is reportedly equivocal, suggesting use is not sustained beyond initial training.4-6 Understanding perspectives of those using SBAR may further improve clinical communication. We investigated senior medical undergraduate perspectives on SBAR, particularly when communicating with senior colleagues. Methodology: Mixed methods data collection was used. A previously piloted questionnaire with 12 five point Lickert scale questions and 3 open questions was given to all final year medical students. A subgroup also participated in 10 focus groups, deploying strictly structured audio-recorded questions. Selection was by convenience sampling, data gathered by open text questions and comments transcribed verbatim. In-vivo coding (iterative, towards data saturation) preceded thematic analysis. Results: 233 of 255 students (91%) completed the survey. 1. There were clearly contradictory viewpoints on SBAR usage. A recurrent theme was a desire for formal feedback and a relative lack of practice/experience with SBAR. 2. Students reported SBAR as having variable interpretation between individuals; limiting use as a shared mental model. 3. Brief training sessions are insufficient to embed the tool. 4. Most students reported SBAR helping effective communication, especially by providing structure in stressful situations. 5. Only 18.5% of students felt an alternative resource might be needed. Sub analysis of the themes highlighted: A. Lack of clarity regarding what information to include and information placement within the acronym, B. Senior colleague negative response to SBAR C. Lack of conciseness with the tool. Discussion and Conclusions: Despite a wide range of contradictory interpretation of SBAR utility, most students wish to retain the resource. More practice opportunities/feedback may enhance user confidence and understanding. References: (1) Leonard M, Graham S, Bonacum D. The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care. Quality & Safety in Health Care 2004 Oct;13(Suppl 1):85-90. (2) d'Agincourt-Canning LG, Kissoon N, Singal M, Pitfield AF. Culture, communication and safety: lessons from the airline industry. Indian J Pediatr 2011 Jun;78(6):703-708. (3) Dunsford J. Structured communication: improving patient safety with SBAR. Nurs Womens Health 2009 Oct;13(5):384-390. (4) Compton J, Copeland K, Flanders S, Cassity C, Spetman M, Xiao Y, et al. Implementing SBAR across a large multihospital health system. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2012 Jun;38(6):261-268. (5) Ludikhuize J, de Jonge E, Goossens A. Measuring adherence among nurses one year after training in applying the Modified Early Warning Score and Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation instruments. Resuscitation 2011 Nov;82(11):1428-1433. (6) Cunningham NJ, Weiland TJ, van Dijk J, Paddle P, Shilkofski N, Cunningham NY. Telephone referrals by junior doctors: a randomised controlled trial assessing the impact of SBAR in a simulated setting. Postgrad Med J 2012 Nov;88(1045):619-626.