Richard Charon
So driving up to Manchester now has given Chris and I time to reflect on yesterday's course. It was different in many ways, we had feedback ranging from "Excellent" in all respects from some, to "Good" (the lowest score) in all respects from another, which means we failed in some respects for that person.
The most significant difference from all other previous courses, was that of the 14 delegates (of a maximum possible of 16) three were dentists in general practice, one of whom came alone, one brought 3 nurses and an Associate and another group of 3 dental nurses attended without their dentists. Then we had 5 dentists who worked in the community service. So we had and a larger proportion of nurses than usual, two of whom, were in the early stages of training.
Given that the course has been designed with GDPs and their teams in private practice in mind, certain aspects of my presentation style and content and examples of clinical successes, bore little relevance to many of the delegates. It is interesting to note that given the requirements for everyone already involved in sedation to have regular updates, that there would appear to be inadequate provision for those in the community service. So perhaps a 1/2 day update with the focus on children and special needs, for example would better suit their needs. I will look into this through SAAD.
The two trainee DNs were attentive, nevertheless at least 50% of the theory content is likely to have gone straight over their heads, understandably once we got into neurophysiology and neuropharmacology. Yet one delegate's feedback wanted more academic content (a first request for this after 34 courses since 2003). More to follow.
The most significant difference from all other previous courses, was that of the 14 delegates (of a maximum possible of 16) three were dentists in general practice, one of whom came alone, one brought 3 nurses and an Associate and another group of 3 dental nurses attended without their dentists. Then we had 5 dentists who worked in the community service. So we had and a larger proportion of nurses than usual, two of whom, were in the early stages of training.
Given that the course has been designed with GDPs and their teams in private practice in mind, certain aspects of my presentation style and content and examples of clinical successes, bore little relevance to many of the delegates. It is interesting to note that given the requirements for everyone already involved in sedation to have regular updates, that there would appear to be inadequate provision for those in the community service. So perhaps a 1/2 day update with the focus on children and special needs, for example would better suit their needs. I will look into this through SAAD.
The two trainee DNs were attentive, nevertheless at least 50% of the theory content is likely to have gone straight over their heads, understandably once we got into neurophysiology and neuropharmacology. Yet one delegate's feedback wanted more academic content (a first request for this after 34 courses since 2003). More to follow.
No comments:
Post a Comment