Topic area | Positive/rewards | Negative/challenges |
---|---|---|
Priority no. 1. Facilitator: Selection | Broad range of qualifications (ILS & ALS). Facilitators were well-motivated. | Junior ranks training more senior ranks. No advanced advertising to facilitators. Lack of paramedic buy in/support. New employees included as facilitators. |
Priority no. 2. Program Ownership | Reasonable collaboration between CQI, HRD, operations, and communications. | Ambulance base management was not formally embedded into the program. No direct oversight by base managers. |
Priority no. 3. Facilitator: Training | Covered content well. | Not enough time for training/mastery. Did not “upskill” on facilitation. |
Priority no. 4. Program Content and Materials | Content was clinically and locally applicable. Repetition of core concepts was good. Current/evidence-based guidelines. Training was quality-driven from start. | Content was narrow/focused – can add more content as needed (e.g., airway). 1 training material not available (tourniquets). Concern for facilitator burnout. |
Priority no. 5. Program Structure: Format | Good for learning. Provides on-going instruction. | TruShoC program felt short for learners. Possibly too many training modules. |
Priority no. 6. Program Structure: Logistics | On-shift is good timing. Able to collect all documentation. | Need feedback loop to facilitators. Unsustainable on a large scale? |