Peter O'Meara1, Brett Williams2, Helen Hickson3. 1. La Trobe University, Bendigo, Australia. Electronic address: p.omeara@latrobe.edu.au. 2. Monash University Department of Community Emergency Health and Paramedic Practice, Frankston, Australia. 3. La Trobe University, Bendigo, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the elements of quality clinical and field placements through the eyes of paramedic instructors. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTINGS: Two large paramedic services in two countries where the entry to practice qualification for paramedics has been set at the Bachelors degree level. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen purposively selected paramedic instructors were invited to voluntarily participate. The criterion for inclusion was that they had supervised at least one university paramedicine student on a field placement. Recruitment ceased when saturation was reached. METHODS: Face to face semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants who were asked their views and expectations of paramedicine student clinical and field placements. Inductive thematic analysis of the transcripts was completed using Nvivo software. RESULTS: The elements of quality clinical and field placements from the perspective of paramedic instructors were identified. With no agreed clinical and field placement paramedicine standards in the countries studied there is variation in the focus of placements, preferred settings, and expectations. Vocationally trained paramedics favoured paramedic service placements, whilst university educated paramedics see benefits in placements in more diverse settings. CONCLUSIONS: Paramedic services and universities need to collaboratively address the variation in paramedicine university student clinical and field placements. Standards need to be developed that address the purpose of placements, expectations of students and instructors, and be scaffolded across the education spectrum from undergraduate student to graduate paramedic to instructor.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the elements of quality clinical and field placements through the eyes of paramedic instructors. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTINGS: Two large paramedic services in two countries where the entry to practice qualification for paramedics has been set at the Bachelors degree level. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen purposively selected paramedic instructors were invited to voluntarily participate. The criterion for inclusion was that they had supervised at least one university paramedicine student on a field placement. Recruitment ceased when saturation was reached. METHODS: Face to face semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants who were asked their views and expectations of paramedicine student clinical and field placements. Inductive thematic analysis of the transcripts was completed using Nvivo software. RESULTS: The elements of quality clinical and field placements from the perspective of paramedic instructors were identified. With no agreed clinical and field placement paramedicine standards in the countries studied there is variation in the focus of placements, preferred settings, and expectations. Vocationally trained paramedics favoured paramedic service placements, whilst university educated paramedics see benefits in placements in more diverse settings. CONCLUSIONS: Paramedic services and universities need to collaboratively address the variation in paramedicine university student clinical and field placements. Standards need to be developed that address the purpose of placements, expectations of students and instructors, and be scaffolded across the education spectrum from undergraduate student to graduate paramedic to instructor.