Background A new challenge for healthcare managers is to improve the patient experience. Simulation is often used for clinical assessment and rarely for those operating outside of direct clinical care. Sequential simulation (SqS) is a form of simulation that re-creates care pathways, widening its potential use.
Local problem Numbers, outcome measures and system profiling are used to inform healthcare decisions. However, none of these captures the personal subtleties of a patient’s experience.
Intervention 56 students attended a teaching module using SqS and facilitated workshops as part of their induction week on an MSc International Health Management course. The workshop was voluntary and was offered as an opportunity for the students to gain an insight into the UK health system through the medium of simulation.
Methods An evaluation survey incorporating quantitative and qualitative student feedback was conducted. Descriptive statistics were generated from the quantitative data, and thematic analysis was undertaken for the qualitative data.
Results There was strong agreement for the acceptability of the workshop approach in relation to the aims and objectives. Likert scale (1–-5) mean total=4.49. Participants responded enthusiastically (revealed through the qualitative data) with ideas related to perspectives sharing, understanding healthcare management and processes and the consideration of feasibility and practicalities. They also suggested other applications that SqS could be used for.
Conclusion The SqS approach has demonstrated that simulation has a wider potential than for clinical assessment alone. Further studies are required to determine its potential uses and affordances beyond its current format.
- sequential simulation (SqS)
- healthcare management
- healthcare re-modelling
- care pathway
- patient experience
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors SMW conceived and designed the study, collected, cleaned and analysed the data, drafted and revised the paper. She is guarantor. TK helped design the study, collected, cleaned and analysed the data and revised the draft paper. EA helped design the project, provided clinical guidance and revised the drafted paper. BC initiated the collaborative project, helped design the project, monitored the study and provided guidance and revised the final draft. FB and RK initiated the collaborative project, monitored the study and provided guidance and revised the final draft.
Funding This work has been supported by Health Education North West London and Imperial College Business School.
Competing interests None declared for SMW, EA, TK & BC. FB & RK are unpaid Director and Founding Shareholders of Convincis Ltd
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval The Imperial College Research Ethics Committee (ICREC reference: 14IC2251).
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.