Search

What was the educational challenge? Medical student abuse within work-integrated learning (WIL) is well-reported, with negative consequences for wellbeing, motivation, and learning. Conversely, workplace dignity, described as respecting the worth of others and self, has positive impacts on wellbeing, learning, and relationships for WIL students and supervisors. Stakeholders often struggle to articulate what workplace dignity means, and can downplay or do nothing in the face of WIL indignities. What was the solution and how was this implemented? We created an innovative research-informed online learning resource about WIL dignity to improve stakeholders' understandings and help them get the best from WIL placements ensuring these are dignified, safe, and educationally productive. The resource included three topics: (a) workplace dignity and why it matters; (b) upholding dignity; and (c) strengthening dignity. What lessons were learned? We conducted a pilot qualitative evaluation involving 13 semi-structured interviews with students and supervisors to elicit their views and experiences of the resource. Our key findings across three overarching categories were: (1) perceived benefits (motivations to complete the resource; content of the resource; online pedagogies); (2) potential applications of learning (reinforcing existing knowledge; developing new knowledge; promoting reflection; changing workplace practices); and (3) suggested improvements (barriers to resource use; resource content; online pedagogies; timing of resource implementation; embedding the resource in broader learning). What are the next steps? Although we identified numerous perceived benefits, and applications of learning, the findings suggested opportunities for further development, especially improving the resource's social interactivity. We recommend that further resource implementation includes student-educator and student-peer interactivity to maximise learning, and longitudinal evaluation of the resource. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasing evidence of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare workers' mental health and wellbeing has prompted concerns about the longer-term impacts on healthcare delivery and health workforce sustainability. For rural health services and communities, the pandemic has compounded existing challenges including workforce shortages, potentially leading to further health inequalities. This qualitative interview study aimed to explore factors within and external to the health service environment that influenced health service staff mental health and wellbeing in rural and regional Victoria, Australia, during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Participants were recruited from nine publicly funded rural and regional health services. Semistructured interviews were conducted via videoconference, audio-recorded, and transcribed. Data were analysed using a five-stage framework approach. Eighteen health service staff from four rural areas participated in the study. A range of factors that were perceived by participants to influence their wellbeing were identified. These were coded to four main themes: (1) rural community relations, (2) the nature of the health workplace, (3) self-care and supportive networks, and (4) public health measures and the unpredictable nature of the pandemic. Factors coded to these themes were described as both positive and negative influences on health staff mental health and wellbeing. Optimising the mental health and wellbeing of rural health staff is imperative to the sustainability of this workforce during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Rural health services must consider the community and health service (meso-level), individual (microlevel), and broader pandemic context (macrolevel) when developing and implementing strategies to promote staff wellbeing. Strategies must encompass the development of senior leadership capabilities, mechanisms to support effective leadership, and optimal communication processes within health services. Given the potential for community support to positively influence rural health staff wellbeing, community engagement should be a feature of health service wellbeing strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Allied health assistants (AHAs) are important members of the health workforce and key to meeting population health needs. Previous studies exploring the role and utility of AHAs from multiple stakeholder perspectives suggest AHAs remain poorly utilised in many healthcare settings. This qualitative study explores the experiences and perspectives of AHAs working in healthcare settings to determine the contextual factors influencing their role, and mechanisms to maximise their utility. We conducted semi‐structured interviews using purposive sampling with 21 AHAs, from one regional and three metropolitan health services in Australia, between February and July 2021. We used a team‐based framework approach to analyse the data. Four major themes were identified: 1) AHAs' interpersonal relationships, 2), clarity and recognition of AHA roles and role boundaries, 3) AHAs accessing education and professional development, and 4) the professional identity of the AHA workforce. Underpinning each of these themes were relationships between AHAs and other healthcare professionals, their patients, health services, and the wider AHA workforce. This study may inform initiatives to optimise the utility of AHAs and increase their role in, and impact on, patient care. Such initiatives include the development and implementation of guidelines and competencies to enhance the clarity of AHAs' scope of practice, the establishment of standardised educational pathways for AHAs, and increased engagement with the AHA workforce to make decisions about their scope of practice. These initiatives may precede strategies to advance the AHA career structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Identifying priority research topics that meet the needs of multiple stakeholders should maximize research investment. Aim: To identify priorities for health education research. Methods: A three-stage sequential mixed methods study was conducted. Priorities for health education research were identified through a qualitative survey with 104 students, patients, academics, and clinicians across five health sciences and 12 professions (stage 1). These findings were analyzed using framework analysis and transposed into a quantitative survey whereby 780 stakeholders rated and ranked the identified priorities. Descriptive statistics identified priorities, exploratory factor analysis grouped priorities and differences between stakeholders were determined using Mann–Whitney U tests (stage 2). Six individual or group interviews with 16 participants (stage 3) further explicated the results from previous stages. Results: Of 30 priorities identified, the top were: how best to ensure students develop the required skills for work; how to promote resiliency and well-being in students; and ensuring the curriculum prepares students for work. For the majority of priorities, no significant differences were found between different stakeholder groups. Conclusions: These findings will be used to inform health educational research strategy both locally and nationally. Further research should explore if setting priorities can be translated effectively into education research policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diabetes presents a challenge to healthcare services worldwide. Diabetes educators work with individuals and communities to reduce the impact of diabetes. In Australia, diabetes educators derive from one of several primary qualifications including nursing, medicine or a specified allied health background, and have an accredited postgraduate qualification in diabetes education. The peak professional body, the Australian Diabetes Educators Association (ADEA), promotes equivalence of all diabetes educators in terms of their scope of practice. However, in practice, there is evidence of inequities, particularly between those from nursing and allied health backgrounds. This paper uses a neo-Weberian lens to explore the interprofessional role dynamics of a 'postprofessional' group of practitioners, who adopt a common role and title to create a professional identity at post-qualifying level. Data were collected via individual interviews with 19 stakeholders and analysed using an abductive template approach. Differential role boundaries between nurse and allied health diabetes educators were established and reinforced in several ways. Diabetes education is considered a sub-specialty of nursing only; access to education and credentialing has been restricted for allied health; reinforcement of professional stereotypes and perceived professional values; and perceived legislative differences in access to medication management for nurse and allied health diabetes educators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]