An Evaluation of the Transfer of Skills and Knowledge from Two World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists Fellowship Programs.

M Dylan Bould,J Bradley Cousins,Jenny Hoang,Yuanting Zha,Lydia Yilma,V Mark Gacii,Balavenkat Subramanian,Faye M Evans
{"title":"An Evaluation of the Transfer of Skills and Knowledge from Two World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists Fellowship Programs.","authors":"M Dylan Bould,J Bradley Cousins,Jenny Hoang,Yuanting Zha,Lydia Yilma,V Mark Gacii,Balavenkat Subramanian,Faye M Evans","doi":"10.1213/ane.0000000000006923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nSubspecialist training is an important part of developing human resources for health and for some learners, may require taking place in another, higher-resourced country. Despite effective learning of skills and knowledge in a different, more highly resourced context, transfer of these skills and knowledge back to a more poorly resourced context can be a challenge. We aimed to evaluate the transfer of skills and knowledge in 2 World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) fellowship programs.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThis qualitative program evaluation study, guided by Guskey's evaluation framework, used in-depth interviews of both faculty and graduates of the 2 fellowship programs. Interviews were conducted remotely, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using qualitative content and pattern analysis.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nWe interviewed 2 administrators, 10 faculty members, 17 graduated fellows, and 3 graduated fellows now in the role of faculty member in that fellowship. Key themes were barriers and enablers to the transfer of skills, including workplace and staffing, resources, mentorship, the interprofessional team, and leadership. Graduated fellows were able to have an impact on returning home in the areas of practice and service development, research, and teaching.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nOur study found that the 2 fellowship programs had variable success in the transfer of learned skills and knowledge back to the fellows' \"home\" institutions. Contextual differences between the fellowship institution and the home institution were the main source of barriers to transfer, and fellows from different countries had diverse needs. Supporting the transfer of knowledge and skills should be an explicit goal of these fellowship programs, and as such, should be considered in the recruitment of fellows, curriculum development, and in how the success of a fellowship is evaluated. Curricula should not just focus on medical knowledge and skills, but also skills in leading change and in education.","PeriodicalId":7799,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesia & Analgesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000006923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Subspecialist training is an important part of developing human resources for health and for some learners, may require taking place in another, higher-resourced country. Despite effective learning of skills and knowledge in a different, more highly resourced context, transfer of these skills and knowledge back to a more poorly resourced context can be a challenge. We aimed to evaluate the transfer of skills and knowledge in 2 World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) fellowship programs. METHODS This qualitative program evaluation study, guided by Guskey's evaluation framework, used in-depth interviews of both faculty and graduates of the 2 fellowship programs. Interviews were conducted remotely, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using qualitative content and pattern analysis. RESULTS We interviewed 2 administrators, 10 faculty members, 17 graduated fellows, and 3 graduated fellows now in the role of faculty member in that fellowship. Key themes were barriers and enablers to the transfer of skills, including workplace and staffing, resources, mentorship, the interprofessional team, and leadership. Graduated fellows were able to have an impact on returning home in the areas of practice and service development, research, and teaching. CONCLUSIONS Our study found that the 2 fellowship programs had variable success in the transfer of learned skills and knowledge back to the fellows' "home" institutions. Contextual differences between the fellowship institution and the home institution were the main source of barriers to transfer, and fellows from different countries had diverse needs. Supporting the transfer of knowledge and skills should be an explicit goal of these fellowship programs, and as such, should be considered in the recruitment of fellows, curriculum development, and in how the success of a fellowship is evaluated. Curricula should not just focus on medical knowledge and skills, but also skills in leading change and in education.
对两个世界麻醉医师学会联合会研究金项目技能和知识转移的评估。
背景亚专科培训是开发卫生人力资源的重要组成部分,对一些学员来说,可能需要在另一个资源较丰富的国家进行培训。尽管在不同的、资源更丰富的环境中可以有效地学习技能和知识,但将这些技能和知识转移到资源更贫乏的环境中可能是一个挑战。我们的目的是评估世界麻醉医师协会联合会(WFSA)的两个奖学金项目中技能和知识的传授情况。访谈以远程方式进行,逐字记录,并使用定性内容和模式分析法进行分析。结果我们访谈了 2 名管理人员、10 名教员、17 名已毕业的研究员和 3 名现在担任该研究项目教员的已毕业研究员。关键主题是技能转移的障碍和促进因素,包括工作场所和人员配备、资源、导师制、跨专业团队和领导力。我们的研究发现,这两个研究金项目在将所学技能和知识传回研究员 "母校 "方面取得了不同程度的成功。来自不同国家的研究人员有着不同的需求,而研究机构与母校之间的环境差异是阻碍知识转移的主要原因。支持知识和技能的传授应该是这些研究金项目的明确目标,因此在招募研究员、制定课程以及评估研究金成功与否时都应该考虑到这一点。课程不应只注重医学知识和技能,还应注重领导变革和教育方面的技能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信