- Email: [email protected]
Evaluating The Effectiveness of Prezi in Higher Education
which was to serve as a central repository of reference information for all disciplines, Radiation Therapy, Radiation Oncology, Medical Physics and Radiation Oncology Nursing. Process: Using Clarity Content Manager, provided by Sunnybrook administration, the Odette Cancer Centre department of Radiation Oncology adapted the intranet space to serve as a departmental information archive. The intranet can be accessed via four main portals divided via discipline through which discipline specific information can be accessed. Material relevant to all disciplines is linked through common pages and all information can be accessed allowing inter-professional collaboration. Information is maintained via dedicated and non-dedicated roles and includes protocols, policies and procedures, practice changes, educational self studies, informational updates, calendars, etc. Benefits/Challenges: A comprehensive intranet, used as a central repository of reference information provides; ease of access and dissemination of information; a singular source of truth for information; a method for standards to be maintained and communicated throughout entire department; a forum for educational self study; a collaborative forum. Challenges include; interdisciplinary realms of responsibility and overlap; issues during digital service interruptions; standardization of content format; common language, clarity and flow; and maintenance of content. Impact, Indications and Outcomes: The Radiation Oncology intranet provides staff up to date discipline-relevant information. Information includes but is not limited to; protocols; education; research; memos and minutes; policies and procedures; quality assurance; calendars; and practice changes. Recommendations: A comprehensive intranet, used as a central repository of reference information can provide institutions with continual changes in information; a novel means to standardize the communication and dissemination of knowledge.
Do We Still Treat Benign Conditions with Radiation? Emily Sinclair, MRT(T), BSc, MSc(c) Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Hospital Each year in the developed world 100 million patients acquire scars, some of which cause considerable problems, as a result of 55 million elective operations and 25 million operations after trauma. There are an estimated 11 million keloid scars and four million burn scars, 70% of which occur in children. Radiation was first used for treating keloids in 1906, however the debate on how safe this practice is still continues. Treating benign conditions with high energy radiation is not something that physicians would agree to lightly, so why do we still do it? Keloid scars are the commonest benign disease treated with radiation therapy at this point in our history. We have in the past treated many other benign conditions but we now know the long term risks of giving unnecessary radiation. What other benign conditions have we treated in the past? What are the long term risks of radiation treatment? Do all keloid scars need radiation therapy? How low a dose can we use and what energy would serve us best? Are there safer options when treating keloid scars than using radiation therapy? At what point would you, the audience, take the risk of radiation induced long term side effects, (while looking at various keloid images)? We conclude that the risk of carcinogenesis attributable to keloid radiation therapy is very low when surrounding tissues, especially in children and infants, are adequately protected, and that radiation therapy is acceptable as a keloid treatment modality. Botwood 1999 ‘‘Whilst there are no other satisfactory solutions to troublesome keloids, radiotherapy seems destined to remain the mainstay of treatment.’’
Informed Consent and Shared Decision Making (SDM): Is Patient Participation in Treatment Decisions Regarding Palliative Care a Realistic Methodology? Carina Nicole Feuz, MRT(T), BSc (Hons), DipHSc(RadTh), MSc(c) Princess Margaret Cancer Centre
174
Patients require information to make informed decisions and consent to medical treatment. Shared decision-making is a methodology which promotes a patient-centred approach to informed consent and demonstrates respect for autonomy. The literature identifies that palliative cancer patients desire the opportunity to be involved with decision-making discussions which has shown to increase knowledge and result in better health-related outcomes. However, ethical and legal issues regarding the practicality of including this patient population in shared decision-making discussions raises questions about validity of consent. For shared decision-making to be considered a valid methodology to obtain informed consent, open and honest communication between the patient and multidisciplinary team is essential. Treatment options for palliative cancer patients are often complex and shared decision-making allows healthcare professionals and patients to exchange information and negotiate feasible treatment options based on medical expertise and patient preferences. Legal frameworks have defined current standards of practice for various healthcare professions, including radiation therapy. Radiation therapists, as members of the multidisciplinary team, are currently key contributors in providing information to patients regarding the radiotherapy process. Individuals working within advanced practice roles have the ability to develop skills once considered to be within medical domains and have begun to incorporate the delegated act of obtaining informed consent into practice which has shown to increase professional autonomy, accountability and improves patient-centred care.
Evaluating The Effectiveness of Prezi in Higher Education Alfred Lam, MA(Ed), MRT(T) The Michener Institute for Applied Health Sciences Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of using Prezi, the online presentation software, used in the didactic portion of a patient care course offered to second year Radiation Therapy Students. This course focused on site specific side effects and management. Common methods used to deliver didactic education were through PowerPoint; Prezi was used as an alternative. It has been described as innovative and dynamic, allowing for zooming in and out to focus on general and specific content. There has been limited research in the area of this new presentation software and its effectiveness on enhancing student learning. Methods: An ethics review board approved an electronic survey sent to 51 second year Radiation Therapy students. A quantitative methodology was chosen comprising of a survey which examined themes of Prezi’s effectiveness, level of student engagement, attentiveness and aesthetics. All six lectures were delivered using the Prezi format. Results were analyzed via descriptive statistics. Results: The response rate to the survey was 67% (31 students). The various learning styles of the participants were examined. 58.5% (20 students) learned by a mixture of visual, tactile and auditory learning. 52.9% (18 students) found Prezi to be very effective in their learning. There was strong agreement (55.9% or 19 students) that Prezi enhanced student interest. 64.7% (22 students) agreed they would use Prezi in their own future presentations. 53% (18 students) enjoyed the Prezi format over the traditional PowerPoint. A large proportion (88.2% or 28 students) felt that the platform was aesthetically pleasing. Discussion and Conclusion: The studied demonstrated that Prezi was an effective lecture tool for didactic patient care instruction. The literature also states that other factors could have influenced the results, such as the perceived skill of the lecturer. Further research is needed in studying the advantages and disadvantages of Prezi. In addition, the use of Prezi in other areas besides higher education could be examined. Does Age Determine How You Interact with Your Peers? Emily Sinclair, MRT(T), BSc, MSc (c) Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Hospital For the first time in history we have 4 (some say 5) generations in the same workforce, doing the same job but in radically different ways. We can easily
Conference Proceedings from RTi3 2014/Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 45 (2014) 162-188
Do We Still Treat Benign Conditions with Radiation? Emily Sinclair, MRT(T), BSc, MSc(c) Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Hospital Each year in the developed world 100 million patients acquire scars, some of which cause considerable problems, as a result of 55 million elective operations and 25 million operations after trauma. There are an estimated 11 million keloid scars and four million burn scars, 70% of which occur in children. Radiation was first used for treating keloids in 1906, however the debate on how safe this practice is still continues. Treating benign conditions with high energy radiation is not something that physicians would agree to lightly, so why do we still do it? Keloid scars are the commonest benign disease treated with radiation therapy at this point in our history. We have in the past treated many other benign conditions but we now know the long term risks of giving unnecessary radiation. What other benign conditions have we treated in the past? What are the long term risks of radiation treatment? Do all keloid scars need radiation therapy? How low a dose can we use and what energy would serve us best? Are there safer options when treating keloid scars than using radiation therapy? At what point would you, the audience, take the risk of radiation induced long term side effects, (while looking at various keloid images)? We conclude that the risk of carcinogenesis attributable to keloid radiation therapy is very low when surrounding tissues, especially in children and infants, are adequately protected, and that radiation therapy is acceptable as a keloid treatment modality. Botwood 1999 ‘‘Whilst there are no other satisfactory solutions to troublesome keloids, radiotherapy seems destined to remain the mainstay of treatment.’’
Informed Consent and Shared Decision Making (SDM): Is Patient Participation in Treatment Decisions Regarding Palliative Care a Realistic Methodology? Carina Nicole Feuz, MRT(T), BSc (Hons), DipHSc(RadTh), MSc(c) Princess Margaret Cancer Centre
174
Patients require information to make informed decisions and consent to medical treatment. Shared decision-making is a methodology which promotes a patient-centred approach to informed consent and demonstrates respect for autonomy. The literature identifies that palliative cancer patients desire the opportunity to be involved with decision-making discussions which has shown to increase knowledge and result in better health-related outcomes. However, ethical and legal issues regarding the practicality of including this patient population in shared decision-making discussions raises questions about validity of consent. For shared decision-making to be considered a valid methodology to obtain informed consent, open and honest communication between the patient and multidisciplinary team is essential. Treatment options for palliative cancer patients are often complex and shared decision-making allows healthcare professionals and patients to exchange information and negotiate feasible treatment options based on medical expertise and patient preferences. Legal frameworks have defined current standards of practice for various healthcare professions, including radiation therapy. Radiation therapists, as members of the multidisciplinary team, are currently key contributors in providing information to patients regarding the radiotherapy process. Individuals working within advanced practice roles have the ability to develop skills once considered to be within medical domains and have begun to incorporate the delegated act of obtaining informed consent into practice which has shown to increase professional autonomy, accountability and improves patient-centred care.
Evaluating The Effectiveness of Prezi in Higher Education Alfred Lam, MA(Ed), MRT(T) The Michener Institute for Applied Health Sciences Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of using Prezi, the online presentation software, used in the didactic portion of a patient care course offered to second year Radiation Therapy Students. This course focused on site specific side effects and management. Common methods used to deliver didactic education were through PowerPoint; Prezi was used as an alternative. It has been described as innovative and dynamic, allowing for zooming in and out to focus on general and specific content. There has been limited research in the area of this new presentation software and its effectiveness on enhancing student learning. Methods: An ethics review board approved an electronic survey sent to 51 second year Radiation Therapy students. A quantitative methodology was chosen comprising of a survey which examined themes of Prezi’s effectiveness, level of student engagement, attentiveness and aesthetics. All six lectures were delivered using the Prezi format. Results were analyzed via descriptive statistics. Results: The response rate to the survey was 67% (31 students). The various learning styles of the participants were examined. 58.5% (20 students) learned by a mixture of visual, tactile and auditory learning. 52.9% (18 students) found Prezi to be very effective in their learning. There was strong agreement (55.9% or 19 students) that Prezi enhanced student interest. 64.7% (22 students) agreed they would use Prezi in their own future presentations. 53% (18 students) enjoyed the Prezi format over the traditional PowerPoint. A large proportion (88.2% or 28 students) felt that the platform was aesthetically pleasing. Discussion and Conclusion: The studied demonstrated that Prezi was an effective lecture tool for didactic patient care instruction. The literature also states that other factors could have influenced the results, such as the perceived skill of the lecturer. Further research is needed in studying the advantages and disadvantages of Prezi. In addition, the use of Prezi in other areas besides higher education could be examined. Does Age Determine How You Interact with Your Peers? Emily Sinclair, MRT(T), BSc, MSc (c) Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Hospital For the first time in history we have 4 (some say 5) generations in the same workforce, doing the same job but in radically different ways. We can easily
Conference Proceedings from RTi3 2014/Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences 45 (2014) 162-188