Premium
Transfusion Camp: a prospective evaluation of a transfusion education program for multispecialty postgraduate trainees
Author(s) -
Lin Yulia,
Tilokee Everad,
Chargé Sophie,
Alam Asim,
CsertiGazdewich Christine,
Lau Wendy,
Lee Christie,
Lieberman Lani,
Nixon Paula,
Owens Wendy,
Pavenski Katerina,
Pendergrast Jacob,
Saidenberg Elianna,
Shehata Nadine,
Skeate Robert,
Yi QiLong,
Conrad David,
Dudebout Jill,
Hsia Cyrus C.,
Murphy Michael,
ProkopchukGauk Oksana,
Shah Akshay,
Solh Ziad,
Trudeau Jacqueline,
Zeller Michelle P.,
Callum Jeannie
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
transfusion
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.045
H-Index - 132
eISSN - 1537-2995
pISSN - 0041-1132
DOI - 10.1111/trf.15284
Subject(s) - attendance , medicine , specialty , transfusion medicine , blood transfusion , family medicine , patient care , emergency medicine , nursing , economics , economic growth
BACKGROUND The optimal method of providing transfusion medicine (TM) education has not been determined. Transfusion Camp was established in 2012 at the University of Toronto as a centrally delivered TM education program for postgraduate trainees. The impact of Transfusion Camp on knowledge, attitudes, and self‐reported behavior was evaluated. METHODS Didactic lectures (delivered locally, by webinar, or recorded) and locally facilitated team‐based learning seminars were delivered over 5 days during the academic year to 8 sites: 7 in Canada and 1 in the United Kingdom. Knowledge assessment using a validated 20‐question multiple‐choice exam was conducted before and after Transfusion Camp. Attitudes and self‐reported behavior were collected through a survey. RESULTS Over 2 academic years (July 2016 to June 2018), 390 trainees from 16 different specialties (predominantly anesthesia, 41%; hematology, 14%; and critical care, 7%) attended at least 1 day of Transfusion Camp. The mean pretest score was 10.3 of 20 (±2.9; n = 286) compared with posttest score of 13.0 (±2.8; n = 194; p < 0.0001). Lower pretest score and greater attendance (4–5 days compared with 1–3 days) were associated with larger improvement in posttest score; delivery format, specialty, and postgraduate year were not. Trainees reported an improvement in self‐rated abilities to manage TM scenarios; 95% rated TM knowledge as very or extremely important in providing patient care; and 81% indicated that they had applied learning from Transfusion Camp into clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS Transfusion Camp increased TM knowledge, fostered a positive attitude toward TM, and enabled a self‐reported positive impact on transfusion practice in postgraduate trainees. It is a novel and scalable approach to delivering TM education.