Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jun 13:4:11.
doi: 10.1186/s41077-019-0101-1. eCollection 2019.

Beyond the clinical team: evaluating the human factors-oriented training of non-clinical professionals working in healthcare contexts

Affiliations

Beyond the clinical team: evaluating the human factors-oriented training of non-clinical professionals working in healthcare contexts

Mary Lavelle et al. Adv Simul (Lond). .

Abstract

Background: As clinical simulation has evolved, it is increasingly used to educate staff who work in healthcare contexts (e.g. hospital administrators) or frequently encounter clinical populations as part of their work (e.g. police officers) but are not healthcare professionals. This is in recognition of the important role such individuals play in the patients' experience of healthcare, frequently being a patients' first point of contact with health services. The aim of the training is to improve the ability of the team to communicate and co-ordinate their actions, but there is no validated instrument to evaluate the human factors learning of non-clinical staff. Our aim was to develop, pilot and evaluate an adapted version of the Human Factors Skills for Healthcare Instrument, for non-clinical professionals.

Method: The 18-item instrument was developed reflecting the human factors skills of situation awareness, decision making, communication, teamwork, leadership, care and compassion and stress and fatigue management. The instrument was piloted pre- and post-training with non-healthcare professionals (n = 188) attending mental health simulation training within an 11-month period (June 2017-April 2018). Trainees were hospital/primary care administrators (n = 53, 28%), police officers (n = 112, 59%), probation officers (n = 13, 7%) and social workers (n = 10, 5%). Most participants were female (n = 110, 59%) and from White ethnic backgrounds (n = 144, 77%).

Results: Six items were removed, five were not sufficiently sensitive to change (d < .3) and one showed poor reliability. The remaining 12 items revealed a Cronbach's alpha of .93. An exploratory factor analysis revealed a one-factor solution, which explained 58.3% of the variance. The final 12-item instrument was sensitive to change post-training (p < .0001) with large effect sizes (d > .7). Cluster analysis revealed that participants with lower pre-training scores showed the greatest improvement.

Discussion: The Human Factors Skills for Healthcare Instrument-Auxiliary version (HuFSHI-A) provides a reliable and valid instrument for the evaluation of human factors skills learning following training of non-clinical populations working in healthcare contexts. Although this instrument has been developed and evaluated with training courses specifically focusing on mental health topics, HuFSHI-A is applicable for any training where teamwork and co-ordination between clinical and non-clinical professionals is considered.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Mean proportional improvement of participants scores post-training by identified clusters alongside participants identified as outliers

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Cook DA, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Comparative effectiveness of technology-enhanced simulation versus other instructional methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Simul Healthc. 2012;7(5):308–320. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3182614f95. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;306(9):978–988. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1234. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zendejas B, Brydges R, Wang AT, Cook DA. Patient outcomes in simulation-based medical education: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28(8):1078–1089. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2264-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Issenberg BS, Mcgaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teacher. 2005;27(1):10–28. doi: 10.1080/01421590500046924. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lavelle Mary, Abthorpe Jennifer, Simpson Thomas, Reedy Gabriel, Little Fiona, Banerjee Anita. MBRRACE in simulation: an evaluation of a multi-disciplinary simulation training for medical emergencies in obstetrics (MEmO) Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2018;38(6):781–788. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2017.1419339. - DOI - PubMed