Chapter 4: Data presentation and Discussion
4.2. Evaluation based on current participants opinion (2014 data)
4.2.4. Evaluation by REACTION:
Reaction intends to measure participant’s feeling about the value of the course. Reaction might not reflect the level of learning achieved but the level of satisfaction.
104 Table 13 Reaction of the participants on the MSVT. (N= 21)
No Topic Comment
60 Goal: personal R50
29% attended the session with a goal to learn details about the OVAS management, 67% didn’t mention about any goal just attended as they have to do it. Staff outside the aged care or community didn’t feel that the session was much helpful to them. They expected more discussion on patients with delirium, hyperactivity, dementia, Employee safety. 61 Objective of
MSVT: R100
71% were happy to know that the MSVT intends to raise awareness about OVAS and to minimise the injury. 19% didn’t have much information about MSVT as they were new staff.
62 Conflict: between views R60, R61, R114
Majority (52%) were satisfied with the training except 9% whose concern was that MSVT not included their unique workplace environment. Some of the issues were resolved on sharing knowledge at practice session.
63 Effect on workplace R115
Discussion about the rate of OVAS incidence in the work place and how many were diffused by using MSVT didn’t find any answer. 52% didn’t have any knowledge on it and 48% didn’t answer the question.
64 Effect on workflow:
52% said MSVT techniques don’t interfere with their workflow, except 3 (14%), who considers OVAS interfering normal work flow or speed
65 Beneficial: R118, R119, R132
Almost all (95%) expects MSVT to be beneficial but no official statistics to show how much benefit MSVT brings every year. 52% think it creates awareness among staff no matter how much benefit it brings in statistics.
66 Enjoyable part: R120, R131
Practical session was enjoyable to most (57%). Morning session to meet with others over a cup of tea was enjoyable (48%), but better morning tea is expected by one third (33%). There is a mixed view about the inclusion of fire training in the same day. Most (67%) staff are alright or have no comment but one third 33% feel unjust.
67 Suggestions to improve: R140
14% think trainer should visit their workplace to assess the risk and develop specific skills on that perspective. 9% feel the need to review the training content and improve presentation as they are coming every year. Another 14% said trainers should be well prepared before presentation. 9 (42%) said real-life statistics would be better to understand how the programme is benefitting us.
For a successful training, it is important that trainees react favourably to the session and to the content as a whole (Kirkpatrick, 2006).
A person’s reaction to a programme depends on the person’s knowledge of the issue (either by attending training, visiting web, reading text or discussing with others), compliance (DHS Victoria, 2012; Saracino, 2015), workplace culture (Cox, 2004), and personal belief (Tatnall, 2003b).
105 52% said, at the end of a session that trainees were requested to fill up a ‘course evaluation’ form, as an optional activity. There were some open question and some Yes/ No options. There was no post- session (after a month or year) evaluation or feedback form.
Effectiveness of a training session depends on the trainee’s perception or reaction about it (De Beijer, 2016; Santos, 2003; Von Treuer, 2013). Do they like it or consider it beneficial for their work or personal gain? More positive image accelerates better knowledge gain to the trainee.
Understanding trainees’ reaction helps identifying their attitude and preparedness to embrace the new skills at work (Ghahramani, 2016; Warmerdam, 2018). It also provides feedback to trainers to identify the weakness of the programme and triggers initiatives for corrective actions or improvement
activities. A positive reaction towards a training would encourage utilising the skills and discussing with peers and supervisors for better implementation of the programme. Most participants (86%) expressed that this training is to assist them understand the OVAS and learn the techniques to avoid injury from the aggressive client. “Advice on priority setting in a conflict like, looking after ourselves first”.
Participants put some suggestions to improve the MSVTs acceptance and better implementation at workplaces: “Change delivery format or presentation to make it more interactive and entertaining”, “A reference card or guideline be provided by trainers, to use in post training period”, “tailored to other workplaces need”, “Improve trainer skills”, “It would be beneficial if trainers visit workplaces to incorporate specific workplace issues with emphasis on difficult residents and visitors”, “Wider publicity needed to inform all staff of BN123 Health to participate”, “On-line facilities be there with interactive materials to allow flexibility of participation and better explanation of the key points”.
Trainers expressed that MSVT was procured by BN123 Health in 1990 as a training package. But their expression didn’t suggest any changes in the content of the training though a few changes had been made in the session plan. BN123 Health functionality has widened by embracing new services in the surrounding environment. To improve the relevance to the ongoing changes in service some dynamic mechanism needs to be developed.
One suggestion could be uplifting the value of the MSVT training team in the BN123 Health management hierarchy. The training team should have more permanent members than existing casuals, with focus on ongoing data analysis of the incidents and near misses, review of training content or methods in the context of national and international development in the subject (occupational violence), collect feedback from supervisors and trainees of all area of the BN123
106 Health, collect feedback from clients and their carers as well as community advocates on client service to understand the impact of staff work practices on the service and customer satisfaction.
Contradicting staff morale or ethics on human rights with the forceful restrain or depriving client’s right of equal access to service (by putting the client away from service through a wall or partition) can reduce service integrity (Afifah, 2015). Staff might not provide the correct service to a client due to his or her own conflict with the service delivery process. Those staff need more training or
counselling.
Overall reaction: 71% (15/21) expressed a positive reaction to MSVT and 42.9% (9/21) were confident to use the skills as they attended multiple sessions during their service time. Still 33% (3/9) of the multi-attendants were not totally happy as the skills do not cover their specific work areas.
There is some discrepancy in OVAS data (R60) where all male (8/8) staff faced OVAS but only 76.9% (10/13) female staff faced that. It happened as two females were working as lifestyle coordinator and physiotherapist, not directly related to caring clients, and one staff was new, it was not known how many days and in what workplace she was working.