Ascertaining the Learning Needs of the Multi-professional Members of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group: A Multimodal Survey
Wardell, Christine1; Herridge, Margaret2, McDonald, Ellen1,3, Ferrari, Nicolay4, Piquette, Dominique5, Burns, Karen6
1 Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; 2 Department of Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada; 3 Department of Medicine, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada; 4 Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada; 5 Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; 6 Department of Medicine, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Introduction
The role of the newly formed National Platform Research Coordinator (NPRC) is to support the research and academic activities of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG). The NPRC is responsible for supporting CCCTG members in 4 key domains including a) core documentation resources; b) research support; c) research training and mentoring; and d) patient and family engagement in critical care.
Objective
We sought to evaluate the relative importance of activities in these 4 domains to the members of the CCCTG. This assessment will provide insight to the NPRC and the CCCTG regarding how best to support the learning needs of the multi-professional CCCTG members.
Methods
We developed a 14 item questionnaire to rate the importance of key academic activities within the aforementioned 4 domains on a scale from 1 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important). We provided participants the opportunity to comment on additional activities not included in the questionnaire. We collected respondents’ demographic data including professional affiliation(s), role within the CCCTG, and length of time in that role. Before administering the questionnaire, we pilot tested it with 6 CCCTG members and assessed its clinical sensibility. Along with the electronic version distributed via SurveyMonkey®, we administered a paper version of the questionnaire at the 2017 Winter CCCTG scientific meeting. All responses were anonymous and questionnaire completion was voluntary. The need for a full Research Ethics Board (REB) application was waived by the Hamilton Health Sciences REB.
Results
From January 2017 to July 2017, the questionnaire was distributed to 458 CCCTG members. 141 (30.8%) CCCTG members completed the questionnaire. Of the 141 respondents, 47.5% were MDs, 39.7% RCs, and 12.8% other allied health care professionals. Approximately one third of the respondents were in the first five years of their profession (38.3%) and another third for more than 15 years (31.9%).
The topic of greatest importance in the ‘core documentation’ domain was ‘maintenance of standardized operating procedures (SOPs)’ (7.9/10).
The research support domain, which prioritized ‘Clinical Trials Ontario’ and ‘REB support’, received the lowest rankings (6.1-6.5/10). However, multiple respondents noted the requirement for increased REB support for members outside of Ontario.
The highest-ranked activity in the ‘training and mentoring’ domain was ‘workshops pertaining to screening and consent’ (7.4/10). RNs ranked ‘Good Clinical Practice and regulatory training’, as well as ‘manuscript/abstract writing/preparation’, 0.5 points above the total averages. Junior professionals ranked ‘finding a good mentor’ higher by 0.7 average points than those who had been in their profession for more than 15 years.
In the domain of ‘patient and family engagement’, ‘preparing for multisite trials’ tied for the top-rating survey-wide response along with SOP maintenance (7.9/10). Respondents also felt strongly about ‘engaging new members’ (7.6/10) and ‘integrating patient engagement into grants and research programs’ (7.7/10).
Conclusion
In its role, the NPRC will focus on improving access to SOPs, developing training opportunities regarding screening and consent, building professional and community partnerships and providing research ethics support to members outside of Ontario. Finally, the NPRC should focus efforts on building mentorships between new and more experienced CCCTG members.
Ascertaining the Learning Needs of the Multi-professional Members of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group: A Multimodal Survey
Wardell, Christine1; Herridge, Margaret2, McDonald, Ellen1,3, Ferrari, Nicolay4, Piquette, Dominique5, Burns, Karen6
1 Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; 2 Department of Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada; 3 Department of Medicine, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada; 4 Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada; 5 Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; 6 Department of Medicine, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Introduction
The role of the newly formed National Platform Research Coordinator (NPRC) is to support the research and academic activities of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG). The NPRC is responsible for supporting CCCTG members in 4 key domains including a) core documentation resources; b) research support; c) research training and mentoring; and d) patient and family engagement in critical care.
Objective
We sought to evaluate the relative importance of activities in these 4 domains to the members of the CCCTG. This assessment will provide insight to the NPRC and the CCCTG regarding how best to support the learning needs of the multi-professional CCCTG members.
Methods
We developed a 14 item questionnaire to rate the importance of key academic activities within the aforementioned 4 domains on a scale from 1 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important). We provided participants the opportunity to comment on additional activities not included in the questionnaire. We collected respondents’ demographic data including professional affiliation(s), role within the CCCTG, and length of time in that role. Before administering the questionnaire, we pilot tested it with 6 CCCTG members and assessed its clinical sensibility. Along with the electronic version distributed via SurveyMonkey®, we administered a paper version of the questionnaire at the 2017 Winter CCCTG scientific meeting. All responses were anonymous and questionnaire completion was voluntary. The need for a full Research Ethics Board (REB) application was waived by the Hamilton Health Sciences REB.
Results
From January 2017 to July 2017, the questionnaire was distributed to 458 CCCTG members. 141 (30.8%) CCCTG members completed the questionnaire. Of the 141 respondents, 47.5% were MDs, 39.7% RCs, and 12.8% other allied health care professionals. Approximately one third of the respondents were in the first five years of their profession (38.3%) and another third for more than 15 years (31.9%).
The topic of greatest importance in the ‘core documentation’ domain was ‘maintenance of standardized operating procedures (SOPs)’ (7.9/10).
The research support domain, which prioritized ‘Clinical Trials Ontario’ and ‘REB support’, received the lowest rankings (6.1-6.5/10). However, multiple respondents noted the requirement for increased REB support for members outside of Ontario.
The highest-ranked activity in the ‘training and mentoring’ domain was ‘workshops pertaining to screening and consent’ (7.4/10). RNs ranked ‘Good Clinical Practice and regulatory training’, as well as ‘manuscript/abstract writing/preparation’, 0.5 points above the total averages. Junior professionals ranked ‘finding a good mentor’ higher by 0.7 average points than those who had been in their profession for more than 15 years.
In the domain of ‘patient and family engagement’, ‘preparing for multisite trials’ tied for the top-rating survey-wide response along with SOP maintenance (7.9/10). Respondents also felt strongly about ‘engaging new members’ (7.6/10) and ‘integrating patient engagement into grants and research programs’ (7.7/10).
Conclusion
In its role, the NPRC will focus on improving access to SOPs, developing training opportunities regarding screening and consent, building professional and community partnerships and providing research ethics support to members outside of Ontario. Finally, the NPRC should focus efforts on building mentorships between new and more experienced CCCTG members.
Ascertaining the Learning Needs of the Multi-professional Members of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group: A Multimodal Survey
Wardell, Christine1; Herridge, Margaret2, McDonald, Ellen1,3, Ferrari, Nicolay4, Piquette, Dominique5, Burns, Karen6
1 Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; 2 Department of Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada; 3 Department of Medicine, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada; 4 Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada; 5 Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; 6 Department of Medicine, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Introduction
The role of the newly formed National Platform Research Coordinator (NPRC) is to support the research and academic activities of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG). The NPRC is responsible for supporting CCCTG members in 4 key domains including a) core documentation resources; b) research support; c) research training and mentoring; and d) patient and family engagement in critical care.
Objective
We sought to evaluate the relative importance of activities in these 4 domains to the members of the CCCTG. This assessment will provide insight to the NPRC and the CCCTG regarding how best to support the learning needs of the multi-professional CCCTG members.
Methods
We developed a 14 item questionnaire to rate the importance of key academic activities within the aforementioned 4 domains on a scale from 1 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important). We provided participants the opportunity to comment on additional activities not included in the questionnaire. We collected respondents’ demographic data including professional affiliation(s), role within the CCCTG, and length of time in that role. Before administering the questionnaire, we pilot tested it with 6 CCCTG members and assessed its clinical sensibility. Along with the electronic version distributed via SurveyMonkey®, we administered a paper version of the questionnaire at the 2017 Winter CCCTG scientific meeting. All responses were anonymous and questionnaire completion was voluntary. The need for a full Research Ethics Board (REB) application was waived by the Hamilton Health Sciences REB.
Results
From January 2017 to July 2017, the questionnaire was distributed to 458 CCCTG members. 141 (30.8%) CCCTG members completed the questionnaire. Of the 141 respondents, 47.5% were MDs, 39.7% RCs, and 12.8% other allied health care professionals. Approximately one third of the respondents were in the first five years of their profession (38.3%) and another third for more than 15 years (31.9%).
The topic of greatest importance in the ‘core documentation’ domain was ‘maintenance of standardized operating procedures (SOPs)’ (7.9/10).
The research support domain, which prioritized ‘Clinical Trials Ontario’ and ‘REB support’, received the lowest rankings (6.1-6.5/10). However, multiple respondents noted the requirement for increased REB support for members outside of Ontario.
The highest-ranked activity in the ‘training and mentoring’ domain was ‘workshops pertaining to screening and consent’ (7.4/10). RNs ranked ‘Good Clinical Practice and regulatory training’, as well as ‘manuscript/abstract writing/preparation’, 0.5 points above the total averages. Junior professionals ranked ‘finding a good mentor’ higher by 0.7 average points than those who had been in their profession for more than 15 years.
In the domain of ‘patient and family engagement’, ‘preparing for multisite trials’ tied for the top-rating survey-wide response along with SOP maintenance (7.9/10). Respondents also felt strongly about ‘engaging new members’ (7.6/10) and ‘integrating patient engagement into grants and research programs’ (7.7/10).
Conclusion
In its role, the NPRC will focus on improving access to SOPs, developing training opportunities regarding screening and consent, building professional and community partnerships and providing research ethics support to members outside of Ontario. Finally, the NPRC should focus efforts on building mentorships between new and more experienced CCCTG members.
Ascertaining the Learning Needs of the Multi-professional Members of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group: A Multimodal Survey
Wardell, Christine1; Herridge, Margaret2, McDonald, Ellen1,3, Ferrari, Nicolay4, Piquette, Dominique5, Burns, Karen6
1 Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; 2 Department of Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada; 3 Department of Medicine, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Canada; 4 Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada; 5 Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; 6 Department of Medicine, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Introduction
The role of the newly formed National Platform Research Coordinator (NPRC) is to support the research and academic activities of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG). The NPRC is responsible for supporting CCCTG members in 4 key domains including a) core documentation resources; b) research support; c) research training and mentoring; and d) patient and family engagement in critical care.
Objective
We sought to evaluate the relative importance of activities in these 4 domains to the members of the CCCTG. This assessment will provide insight to the NPRC and the CCCTG regarding how best to support the learning needs of the multi-professional CCCTG members.
Methods
We developed a 14 item questionnaire to rate the importance of key academic activities within the aforementioned 4 domains on a scale from 1 (not important at all) to 10 (extremely important). We provided participants the opportunity to comment on additional activities not included in the questionnaire. We collected respondents’ demographic data including professional affiliation(s), role within the CCCTG, and length of time in that role. Before administering the questionnaire, we pilot tested it with 6 CCCTG members and assessed its clinical sensibility. Along with the electronic version distributed via SurveyMonkey®, we administered a paper version of the questionnaire at the 2017 Winter CCCTG scientific meeting. All responses were anonymous and questionnaire completion was voluntary. The need for a full Research Ethics Board (REB) application was waived by the Hamilton Health Sciences REB.
Results
From January 2017 to July 2017, the questionnaire was distributed to 458 CCCTG members. 141 (30.8%) CCCTG members completed the questionnaire. Of the 141 respondents, 47.5% were MDs, 39.7% RCs, and 12.8% other allied health care professionals. Approximately one third of the respondents were in the first five years of their profession (38.3%) and another third for more than 15 years (31.9%).
The topic of greatest importance in the ‘core documentation’ domain was ‘maintenance of standardized operating procedures (SOPs)’ (7.9/10).
The research support domain, which prioritized ‘Clinical Trials Ontario’ and ‘REB support’, received the lowest rankings (6.1-6.5/10). However, multiple respondents noted the requirement for increased REB support for members outside of Ontario.
The highest-ranked activity in the ‘training and mentoring’ domain was ‘workshops pertaining to screening and consent’ (7.4/10). RNs ranked ‘Good Clinical Practice and regulatory training’, as well as ‘manuscript/abstract writing/preparation’, 0.5 points above the total averages. Junior professionals ranked ‘finding a good mentor’ higher by 0.7 average points than those who had been in their profession for more than 15 years.
In the domain of ‘patient and family engagement’, ‘preparing for multisite trials’ tied for the top-rating survey-wide response along with SOP maintenance (7.9/10). Respondents also felt strongly about ‘engaging new members’ (7.6/10) and ‘integrating patient engagement into grants and research programs’ (7.7/10).
Conclusion
In its role, the NPRC will focus on improving access to SOPs, developing training opportunities regarding screening and consent, building professional and community partnerships and providing research ethics support to members outside of Ontario. Finally, the NPRC should focus efforts on building mentorships between new and more experienced CCCTG members.
