Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T11:26:25.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Involving patients and carers in developing the radiotherapy curriculum: enhancing compassion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2016

Denyse Hodgson ,
Amy Taylor ,
Vicki Knowles  and
Martin Colley
Denyse Hodgson*
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy & Oncology, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
Amy Taylor
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy & Oncology, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
Vicki Knowles
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy & Oncology, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
Martin Colley
Affiliation:
Radiotherapy & Oncology, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
*
Correspondence to: Dr Denyse Hodgson, Professional, Lead Radiotherapy & Oncology, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, S10 2DN UK. Tel: 0114 225 5579; E-mail: D.A.Hodgson@shu.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

This article describes a collaborative project that aimed to develop a patient-centred curriculum in radiotherapy. In the wake of the Francis report in 2013 and a call for compassion to be a central tenet of health programmes, the project was a timely opportunity to enhance the radiotherapy curriculum.

Methods:

Collaboration between university staff and patients and carers using the service improvement model Plan-Do-Study-Act was the method employed for the curriculum project. Two key discussion forums helped shape the curriculum plan, with module and course evaluation continuing to inform developments.

Results:

The key outcome of the project is that it has shaped the 'care' theme evident in the current undergraduate programme. Co-production methods resulted in the development of a range of shared classroom activities that focus on experiences, care values and communication strategies. The new curriculum has evaluated positively and the impact of learning is demonstrated both in the classroom and clinical setting. The project team have also influenced recruitment processes and patient and carer involvement in programme approval is embedded.

Conclusion:

Working together, with patients and carers is an ideal method to enhance the curriculum and reflect the requirements in practice of current health and social care professions. Further developments in student assessment are planned.

Keywords

compassionco-productioncurriculumpatient and carer involvement
Type
Educational Note
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 92 - 100
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Society and College of Radiographers. Code of Professional Conduct, 5 July 2013, London, UK.Google Scholar
2.The NHS Constitution for England, 26 March 2013, London, England.Google Scholar
3.Department of Health. Delivering high quality, effective, compassionate care: developing the right people with the right skills and the right values. London, England, Williams Lea for the Department of Health, 2013.Google Scholar
4.Department of Health. Education Outcomes Framework. England, 28 March 2013, London, England.Google Scholar
5.NHS England. Putting Patients First: the NHS England business plan for 2014/15–2016/17, London, England.Google Scholar
6.Department of Health. Compassion in Practice; Nursing, Midwifery and Care staff, Our Vision and Strategy, December 2012, London, England.Google Scholar
7.Department of Health. Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry. Chaired by Robert Francis QC, 2013, London, England.Google Scholar
8.Department of Health. Transforming care: a national response to Winterbourne View Hospital: Department of Health Review Final Report, December 2012, London, England.Google Scholar
9.NHS. Review into the quality of care and treatment provided by 14 hospital trusts in England: overview report. Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, July 2013, London, England.Google Scholar
10.Department of Health. NHS Patient Experience Framework, February 2012, London, England.Google Scholar
11.Department of Health. The NHS Outcomes Framework 2011/12, December 2010, London, England.Google Scholar
12.Patient-centred leadership: rediscovering our purpose. The King’s Fund, 2013, London, England.Google Scholar
13. Cornwell, J, Goodrich, J. Exploring how to enable compassionate care in hospital to improve patient experience. Nurs Times 2009; 105 (15): 14–16.Google Scholar
14.National Health Service England. Compassion in Practice; Implementation Plans 2014/2015. Department of Health, London, England.Google Scholar
15. National Clinical Guideline Centre. Patient Experience: Full Guideline. NICE Support for Commissioners and Others: Patient Experience in Adult NHS Services. London: National Clinical Guideline Centre, 2011.Google Scholar
16. Towle, A, Bainbridge, L, Godolphin, W, et al. Active patient involvement in the education of health professionals. Med Educ 2010; 44: 64–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Keenan, G I, Hodgson, D A. Service user involvement in health professional’s education: perspectives of service users. J Radiother Pract 2014; 13 (3): 255–263.Google Scholar
18. Hill, G, Thompson, G, Willis, S, Hodgson, D. Embracing service user involvement in radiotherapy education. Radiography 2014; 20 (1): 82–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Hodgson, D. Patient and carer involvement in the radiotherapy curriculum: the impact on students’ professional development. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2014; 45 (4): 382–389.Google Scholar
20. Allan, H T. Using Psycho-dynamic small group work in nurse education: closing the theory-practice gap? Nurse Educ Today 2011; 31: 521–524.Google Scholar
21. Fabricius, J. Learning to work with feelings – psychodynamic understanding and small group work with junior student nurses. Nurse Educ Today 1991; 11: 134–142.Google Scholar
22. Theodosious, C. Recovering emotion from emotion management. Sociology 2006; 40 (5): 893–910.Google Scholar
23. Delozier, J, Dilts, R. Encyclopedia of NLP and NLP New Coding. California, USA: NLP University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
24. Thorne, S E, Kuo, M, Armstrong, E-A, Mcpherson, G, Harris, S R, Hislop, G. ‘Being known’: patients’ perspectives of the dynamics of human connection in cancer care. Psychooncology 2005; 14: 887–898.Google Scholar
25. Todres, L, Galvin, K, Holloway, I. The humanisation of healthcare: a value framework for qualitative research. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being 2009; 4: 68–77.Google Scholar
26. Paulson, D S. Taking care of patients and caring for patients are not the same. AORN J 2004; 79: 2365–2366.Google Scholar
27. Sanghavi, D M. What makes for a compassionate patient-caregiver relationship? Joint Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2006; 32 (5): 283–292.Google Scholar
28. Sabo, B M. Compassion fatigue and nursing work: can we accurately capture the consequences of caring work? Int J Nurs Pract 2006; 12 (3): 136–142.Google Scholar
29. Dewar, B. Cultivating compassionate care. Nursing Stand 2013; 27 (34): 48–55.Google Scholar
30. Schantz, M L. Compassion: a concept analysis. Nurs Forum 2007; 42 (2): 48–55.Google Scholar
31.NHS Institute of Innovation and Improvement. Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) Cycle. http://www.institute.nhs.uk/. Accessed on 29th September 2016.Google Scholar
32. Evans, K, Guile, D, Harris, J, Allan, H. Putting knowledge to work: a new approach. Nurse Educ Today 2010; 30 (3): 245–251.Google Scholar
33. Health and Care Professions Council. Standards of Proficiency: Radiographers, 2013. London, England.Google Scholar