awards case study


Encouraging collaboration The BMJ Quality platform facilitates collaboration on projects in a number of ways: n The addition of team members to any project. These members have editing rights and are acknowledged as authors in the fi nal publication;


n Project owners can add a mentor. This can be a volunteer mentor or one of their own choosing. This mentor has read only access to the project;


n Use of a messaging system which is exclusive to that project. Team members and mentors can discuss the project and contact members from anywhere in the world;


n Users can connect with other users from across the world via an online community area;


n Users can work across multiple projects with different team members simultaneously.


Sharing project fi ndings through formal publication The programme is evaluated and changes in behaviour shared in a unique way. Users are supported by online workbooks to help them write up their work following good practice guidelines as excellent, usable articles so that fi ndings may be easily discovered and widely disseminated. Once users have completed a project, they can submit it to be considered for


publication in BMJ Quality Improvement Reports journal (qir.bmj.com). The platform uses algorithms to automate the presentation of project work into a journal article format which can be submitted for consideration with a single click. This journal – online, open access, peer reviewed – publishes evidence of global improvement. It has an international readership and aims to help improve healthcare worldwide by building the largest repository of quality improvement projects which are freely available. The journal is indexed by PubMed (a free database of references and abstracts on life sciences and biomedical topics) to ensure that the project fi ndings can be easily found and cited by the wider medical community.


Gathering feedback from the learners Project owners complete a feedback questionnaire at the end of their project and the results have been positive. Users report benefi ts from BMJ Quality, quite apart from fi nding the resources clear and easy to use: n Six out of ten agree that BMJ Quality saved them time in completing a quality improvement project;


n Seven out of ten agree that it will help them further their career; n Eight out of ten agree that it helped them meet their quality targets.


Lessons learned


This distance learning programme provided a number of lessons.The platform and its services needed to be kept fl exible enough to meet the diverse and changing needs of its users. Development is constant based on user feedback and customer needs. The introduction of face-to-face induction training for large groups was one such development. At an organisational level, managers recommended the need to be able to customise the platform for their own audiences and access reports to monitor project – and user – progress.


Recognising achievement and delivering results Delivering measurable quality improvement in healthcare is the primary goal and this is demonstrated in nearly every project. Over 90% of projects submitted are acknowledged by peers and reach the stage of publication. The value of the programme is evident in a number of ways:


n For the individual user, there is an online portfolio to track continuing professional development/continuing medical education (CPD/CME) credits that have been earned.


n For the project, teams measure the baseline of what they are going to improve, e.learning age september 2015


make an intervention, and then re-measure. Where the improvement can be quantifi ed (e.g. reduction in hospital admissions, bed stays, reducing infections etc.), there is a calculator tool and other guidance.


n For BMJ Quality, feedback from users, their mentors and report readers is very positive.


Project reach further underlines the tangible programme benefi ts:


n Over 220 projects have been published, with a further 1000+ projects underway; n Users from over 20 countries, and rising; n Over 115 new quality improvement mentors; n Improvement reports have been accessed over 180,000 times.


This case story by Towards Maturity is part of its good practice partnership with e.learning age and the E-Learning Awards


Dr Genny Dixon is head of Research at Towards Maturity


39


Anecdotal evidence also highlights the impact of the programme: n “It has given me the confi dence in writing up manuscripts for publication. It has also made me understand the aims of good audits and ways to improve health care.” n “The system is easy to use and the journal is an obvious place to publish quality improvement projects before this, it was diffi cult to know which sorts of journals would accept research/projects like this for publication, which meant there was less incentive to become involved in such work. Now, with the clear goal of publication in a BMJ journal, there is much more incentive.” n “I fi nd the articles interesting, informative and inspiring.” n “It provided a goal for our project and pushed us further.”


Top tips for designing and implementing large scale online distance learning n Involve the end users in the design – ask for their feedback and be prepared to act on it;


n In return, provide expert or peer feedback to these users to increase the value of the programme to them;


n Keep the platform fl exible enough to respond to diverse needs; n Support a collaborative approach to learning – BMJ learners could work in local teams, or could pull a new project team together from hospitals around the world that shared a common challenge;


n Seek contributions to the resource content from renowned and respected subject matter experts that add quality and kudos to the programme;


n Invite your key subject matter experts to contribute to the internal community;


n Reward individuals for taking part – for example through certifi cation, badges or CPD points;


n Use peer review to identify successful learning outputs; n Gather and publish feedback as part of a cycle of continuous improvement – including all the various stakeholders in the process.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46