Ok so you get the company in to do Train the trainer sessions , and then those staff go away and train other staff on medical devices. Why can't those people train others to be trainers? Playing devils advocate there, but it is a question that arises time and time again, and yet there seems to be little evidence to back up what seems a universal commitment to medical companies ONLY doing the train the trainer sessions!

Anyone know of any guidelines/policies etc that stipulate this is a requirement? I have been asked this question by numerous emerging equipment libraries and thought it was about time I asked for the wisdom of the ebme club here!

Maybe it's someting to do with Chinese Wispers (2 and 6, we're going to a dance).
The danger is that the key messages will be diluted, re-interpreted or forgotten and after the fourth or fifth "train the trainer" session the training will have changed from the original emphasis.
It is important that the the training is carried out by the people who received the original training from the company.

If the trainers trained new trainers ... then how would the training providers (companies) continue to make their money?

Also, human nature being what it (often) is, have you never come across sad people who are simply, shall we say, unwilling to share their knowledge? They fail to understand that when you share knowledge, you don't lose it. But, there again, knowledge is power (or so they say)!

A Freudian Slip, perhaps? Or just a clever way of reinforcing the point?

"Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance"!

Meanwhile, surely the "key points" would be simple, dare I say bulleted headings?

Monkey see, monkey do, I would have thought!


How come, then, that the army manages better than most with the time-honoured system whereby everyone trains everyone else? It is a given that any guy who has been away "on the course" trains the rest of the bods (if need be) when he comes back to the unit. In the army almost everybody is an instructor in something or other ... even if it's "only" drill!

The difference Geoff is that in the Army you are taught repetitive tasks that do not involve any analysis or reasoning. Whereas, hopefully, medical staff using equipment after appropriate training are going to think about why and how they are using it.

Can I take it, then, that you have never served yourself?


Sounds a lot like mainstream nursing to me! Oh sorry, I forgot, they've all got degrees now.

QUOTE Kawasaki:"in the Army you are taught repetitive tasks that do not involve any analysis or reasoning. Whereas, hopefully, medical staff using equipment after appropriate training are going to think about why and how they are using it."

We were also exempt from Income Tax!!

Funny how many of these ex forces "nodding donkeys's" are now employed in ebme!
Topper

Are you a "nodding donkey", then, Topper ... seeing that you've just made the same post five times?

It's a long time ago now (for me), but I think the "exempt from income tax" thing is a myth. In fact, I seem to recall it being a bone of contention that taxes were paid to the UK regardless of where we happened to be in the world.

There are so many ex-forces blokes in biomed, because (essentially) we built biomed! There were very few other trained techs available back then. If you came across an indigenous NHS type, chances are he would have been a "boffin" from Medical Physics! Yet I still meet non-ex-forces techs who haven't grasped the concept of BER (and all the rest)!

And speaking for myself (and I would say, most of my pals from that era), I was never a "nodding donkey", believe me! Not an ass ... more like kick-ass, in fact. Sounds like I need to make some visits!

Good grief I ask for some input and get a tirade about the army!!!

Also Geoff with the utmost respect, I am a nurse with a degree, and I dont feel that I am that useless - I hope not anyway. I do not feel that my degree represents all of my effort, time and experience as a professional.There are many people with qualifications who took nurse training later in life and do in fact have something to offer besides a piece of paper. Being embroiled in academia and not seeing the real picture is something I do not support; it should be a mix of learnt skills plus hard work & experience. There are some ineffective nurses just as there are some poor engineers, and generalising is insulting.

There had my wee rant!

Now I am digressing -back to question I posed- please?

I am an engineering technician without a degree. And I've already responded to your original question!

What sort of training are you talking about? User training on medical equipment, by nurses and other clinical users?

You were asking about policies and guidelines. Why should anyone need such as these? Why not just get on with the task that needs to be done, that is self-evident, and right before your eyes. You know, the "can-do" approach to getting things done (or, if you like, the army way)!

Yes, I agree, generalising can be insulting. I hope that if anyone is nodding, that they are nodding wisely!

In our Trust we make sure that key personnel are trained trainers with a background of experience eg. Theatre equipment will have Biomed Techs , ODA/Ps , Th. Nurses trained as trained trainers - these would generally be experienced staff who have been here for a while and who promise they're not going to leave (joke). But you do need not go overboard on trained trainers, its a case of a fine balance, and if in the future an experienced member of staff wants to step up for the challenge then assess them and let them do it.

As for the "nodding donkeys" I've seen plenty of ex forces who couldn't pin a tail on a donkey (without the blindfold)in my travels.

As I've said many times before (but will repeat yet again, as this ex-forces theme seems to persist):-

"Repetition trains the donkey"!

Think about it!

Geoff - thought about it - do you keep donkeys?

Not myself, but I do know someone who cares for distressed ones (and hint:- she's always looking for donations towards their upkeep)!

They are the most long-suffering (yet uncomplaining) of beasts, as you may already know.

I don't know if you're ever been out in the so-called Middle East, but (sadly) you will find many abused animals out there. And not all of 'em are the ex-forces types you sometimes find shuffling about in the back of biomed workshops!

Nice to see you making a post for the first time in six years, by the way. Living up to your name, you might. Now that I've flushed you out, my day is complete, you might say. Time for a bacon sandwich, then (and no, I don't keep pigs, either ... the cleanest of animals for those who don't know them)!

I replied,but deleted, but cant be bothered to reiterate the necessity of polices and procedures - bored now! Baiting isnt helpful and it sure doesnt reflect well on the website - luckily Ive an interest in personal development whatever and whenever I can!

Hey, don't be like that! I used to be the king of Policies and Procedures! How many would you like?

On the other hand, a wise old dude once cautioned that "mediocrity finds safety in standardization".

I also picked this one up from somewhere along the way (and some years ago):- "The purpose of a method is to tell you what to do when you don't know what you're doing. Any method that relies too heavily on previous experience isn't telling you much"!

Take it or leave it, as you choose. But this stuff is the "wisdom of the ages"!

Personal development? Phooey! Just live an interesting (and varied) life!

People like me (you know, mere engineering technicians) never get bored. There's always something "challenging" going on. It's an attitude, a state of mind.

This is an internet forum. Not a meeting place for narrow minded academics or so-called professionals. No one pays a subscription fee, as far as I am aware. Within the normal rules netiquette (as sometimes postulated by our good Mr.Huw), all are free to toss in their ha'penny's worth. Even the dull and the ignorant (yes, like me). It's a very democratic process, and that's one of the main reasons that I support it.

Meanwhile, baiting is for bears (or badgers) ... not donkeys!

Personal development? Phooey! Just live an interesting (and varied) life!

How do you know I dont ? The beauty of the net is you just dont know people, and our perceptions colour our opinions of others! My life is ridiculously varied, and comes about because I remain active and interested in a whole range of stuff - not just work!

Not a meeting place for narrow minded academics or so-called professionals.
Ouch! gods you can dish it out! but can you take it?
Hey, don't be like that! tells me you struggle Geoff!

I appreciate the wisdom of those older and wiser than me, what I dont appreciate is a wholesale condemnation of people who choose to study and then are slammed for it. I admit that you have irritated me today - but hey beneath that exterior you have some very useful knowledge, can stretch a hand to those who need advice, and clearly have a lengthy service to draw experience from.Go for it, but dont always expect people to lie down and put up with your tone at times


And anyway when are you coming to the forum to battle face to face? Incidentally the last thing you are is dull and ignorant!

Maybe you're trying to do too much! Perhaps the need for a little more focus is indicated there.

Why not take a step back, and (as they say) take a little time to smell the roses?

Just because someone (like myself, as an example) doesn't boast a university degree, doesn't mean we haven't studied you know! It's just that some of us did not have the opportunities that seem to fall on everyone's lap these days. We had to more or less figure things out for ourselves (and, are probably the better for it, in my opinion).

And yes, I agree that a commentator shouldn't "dish it out" if s/he can't take it, as well. I can.

I offer advice, freely given. If people don't agree with it, or don't "like" it because it doesn't suit their own particular version of reality, well, that's up to them.


Actually, I was just trying to be kind. And wasting my time, obviously.

Must go now. I've got a donkey to feed.

This now looks like a debate between those who went to school and those too busy working to attend school, give me experience over degrees any time, as to pay bands, pay people what they are worth (productivity and enterprise) Me, myself too busy working to earn a degree

Placing modesty aside (just this once) despite having always been a "top of the class" sort of kid at school (even though my Old Man never let me do homework at er, home:- I can still hear him bellowing "School work is to be done at school!"), I nevertheless left school early (at age fifteen, as we could back then), at the end of the fourth year, and so obviously didn't get a shot at University.

I was lucky enough, however, to be steered towards an Apprenticeship in the Army (I doubt that young people in the UK get such opportunities these days, regrettably), and spent three years doing that. It provided the solid foundation for everything I have done since!

In later years, my "university" has been the University of Life. Like you Neil, an inquiring mind, an interest in all things technical, and learning by doing. By far the best combination, in my opinion. Plus a willingness to learn, and take on board new ideas (if they are indeed found to be any good ... which is not always the case)! That's how many of us old-school biomeds were "taught"! Hands-on, practical people, we were, in many ways, the pioneers.

There used to be quite a few of us around. Engineering technicians at C&G, ONC or HNC level. Often ex-Forces, and almost certainly ex-something or other (TV trade is another one that comes to mind). We were the backbone of biomed (and probably still are, for all I know ... I would like to think so, anyway).

And that's one of the reasons that I kind of resent biomed being hijacked (as it seems to be today) by what I would call "educated idiots"! That is, people who appear to be more interested in protecting their precious "professional status", whether this guy is on a different Pay Band to some other guy, NHS politics, car-parking perks, talking about becoming "clinical scientists" and all the rest ... rather than the practicalities of the job, and cracking on with getting the work done, for the benefit of the hospital, the sick, injured and needy. In short, missing the point of it all by at least a country mile!

People may think (correctly in this case) that I have a "thing" about not going to University myself. Well I admit it, I do. Perhaps I should have stayed on, done the sixth form, and all the rest. No doubt I would have become a "University success", as others did! However, Fate decreed that I take a different path. Maybe it was the Gods of Biomed who intervened, who knows! And anyway, what real value are these degrees nowadays, now that they are two-a-penny? That is, "everybody has one"!

By the way, I have worked with, for (and had working for me) many university trained people. I don't recall ever having a problem in "keeping up with them" (often the reverse, in fact). With most of the (best) people I have known and admired, it just never became an issue. In fact, casting my mind back to some of the genius guys I have had the pleasure (privilege) of working with, I can honestly say that I don't remember if they had an engineering degree or not (but most likely it was the latter)!

Meanwhile, with all this talk of training, "training the trainer" and all the rest, I can't understand why hospital-based people don't just follow the time-honoured mentoring system used by surgeons:-

"Watch one, do one, teach one"!

If anyone needs further explanation, then that in itself is indicative of the problem, as far as I'm concerned.

OJT, that what we have been doing for years and it is still the best method, can't do the job you have been assigned catch the next plane home. Classrooms cannot replicate actual situations and never will.

It sure gets my vote!

But don't forget that JoLee is talking about training clinical equipment users (I think)! To be more specific, she is enquiring about policies to do with training the trainer, and stuff like that. What have you got?

10 TRAINER GETS TRAINED
20 TRAINER TRAINS STAFF
30 STAFF MEMBER WANTS TO BECOME A TRAINER
40 TRAINER TRAINS STAFF MEMBER
50 GOTO 20

... see any bugs there?

If the TRAINER needs training before training others is that not like the blind leading the blind.
We still have the situation here, were pass marks are adjusted to ensure that enough people pass the course, and these people will become the teachers of the future, diluting the education in the process. Why not utilise the company specialists for training and send people to the manufacturer for training?

Don't forget we're talking about training users here, not biomeds.

And on the "dumbing down" issue ... any course that I was in charge of have would always have a few failures. Why? Just to encourage the rest!

That is, if high standards aren't set ... what value is the training? In fact, why bother at all?

Sorry if people get fed up with me mentioning the army (heck, why should I apologise?) ... but on some courses, no-one passed. And there were many courses where only one or two (out of many who started out) passed muster. I remember a case where two guys were booted off in the last month of an 18-month course (that certainly made the rest of us buck up a bit)! Standards were never dropped just because the raw material was lacking in some regard. That's what maintaining high standards is all about! How's that for a Quality System?

Of course, that sort of thing flies in the face of official policy in our wonderful Nanny State; where no-one fails, and even the dumbest of the dumb, and the obviously ill-suited, can strive on to several levels of magnitude beyond their natural competence. Pathetic is the word that comes to mind!

If anyone has been down the route of getting an equipment manufacturer or an outside agency to provide a sustained training programme it gets extremely expensive, and training may not always be to standard.
Another way of looking at it is looking at core, functional and equipment specific/proficiency in order to set the level. However that means responsibility for the decision needs to fall somewhere-and thats where the nanny state says 'you can't do that!!, or you can't do this' but we'll pay for someone else to do it. Whinge over.

"Watch one, do one, teach one"!
In this we agree, the reason I posted the topic was because I had been asked by someone in another Trust if there was a policy dictating that we have to train in this way. Getting the medical trainers in from companies to train staff to be trainers is frustrating, and time consuiming and often leads to no one training others anyway! In the Red Cross - we did train the trainer - we got trained once and then trained others, and in that could assess people to go on to train other staff! It worked! BUT sadly we are hemmed in by the guidelines and policies that our employer dictates, and as such we have to work within them. As for the comments about degrees - hmmm!

Lot's of dictating going on there!

A wise old dude once advised me:- "You need to be careful who you work for, as it reflects on your own integrity"!

The Red Cross? Yes, I approve!

Can they not just look at the piece of kit and figure out how it is operated? I have yet to come across a piece of kit (medical or otherwise) that is so poorly designed that it was not apparent how it should be used.
Failing that, read the manual I hear they tell you how to do it.

That's why they've all got university degrees, apparently.

Our rationale here is to have a written procedure for current practice on each piece of kit. Then it's less important who is delivering the training, because the content of the training is defined. This avoids the 'chinese whispers' issue.

In practice, we get the company in to train when equipment is new, then further training is organised between senior nursing staff and critical care techs. The great advantage of getting the company in is, of course, that they bring cake.

Moira

cake indeed!
This is a problem that frustrates me no end.
I am afraid that i am a bit of a pain in the butt to the companies and i make sure that we get our monies worth out of them....over and over.
They dont seem to mind and they never say no, so i must be doing something right. (they dont charge either)
There are more and more companies out there with "reps" and with "clinical specialists". These specialists in my opinion are worth thier weight in gold.
They mostly apear to be ex critical care/A&E nurses or techs.
They know their stuff inside and out.
This is an issue of quality and i aim to deliver good quality training cutting out chinese whispers and blind leading blind.

I have done it all, i have chosen very carefully staff who i think will deliver as trained trainers....trouble is, it looks great on ones CV, but the problem comes when i try to pin them down to actually training staff....its like pushing water up hill with a rake.
So i get the clinical specialists in for a block of training, then a year later, invite them back to get the new starters and the stragglers.
I am the only person i can rely on so i get myself trained up to a high spec, then i get down to the training, my problem is i have upwards of 30 pieces of kit, i simply cannot retain that much information so i chose carefully the high risk stuff and go from there.
We also have the competency paperwork which is presctiptive and ensures that the most important aspects are covered in training, again as Moira says, this cuts out the chinese whispers.
Maybe we should get together Jo and formulate a policy, i know i would like to compose an "agreement" that staff sign when agreeing to become a trainer to then ensure that they honour their commitment to the role.
Geoff, can you think of a suitable punishment for staff if they do not honour this sacred signing? (something that draws blood i fancy)

I can't imagine what makes you think that I should be the arbitrator of punitive action, there, Quinny. Surely by now it is well known that there are two basic motivators:- threat and reward.

Donkeys usually respond quite well to both the carrot and the stick!

But if you insist on punishment ... well, the punishment should always fit the crime. Nothing more (and nothing less).

OK ... next case please!

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/02/56/58/PolicyIssue18.pdf

hmmm !!!

I think I may have mentioned before that policy without compulsion is just an exercise in wishful thinking!

And there, in a nutshell, you have the whole dilemma surrounding the acres and acres of "policy", not only in the NHS, but in Public Sector Britain as a whole.

It's a bit like having a zillion laws ... but without law enforcement (again, just like our wonderful modern society).

Yup

Job satisfaction?

I reckon you will agree with this article on the same website, Geoff?
Whiny Workers

Indeed, Jon. As I may have already told you, when I was overseas I used to avoid the whinging Brits whenever I could!

The trouble is that now I'm stuck back in the UK, there's no escaping them! In fact it's worse, as at least the Brit expats out there had a bit of "go" about them. Around here, most of (what you might call) the indigenous people (when, indeed, you actually come across them) are benefit dependent low-life. In fact, thank Heavens I live in an "ethnically diverse" area (or whatever this week's PC BS term is) ... it makes me feel like I'm still lodging in the back streets of Riyadh!

I came across this word on a forum recently:- sheeple. A lady from Scotland was wondering why the Brits are so, er, tolerant (lazy, complacent ... pick a word). I think we know what she means, do we not? Yes, the Brits are great moaners ... but unlike that other great nation of complainers (that is, the French), we never do anything about our grievances, whether real or imagined.