Skip to main content

Table 3 Components and content of the e-learning program

From: A tailored e-learning program to improve handover in the chain of emergency care: a pre-test post-test study

Component Aim Content
Introduction Explanation on the usage of the e-learning program and the learning goals to the participant Learning goals
The professional knows the elements of a proper DeMIST handover
The professionals knows why it is important to use the DeMIST model for handover
The professional knows the role of the emergency medical dispatcher, ambulance driver, ambulance nurse, emergency nurse and emergency physician during handover
The professional performs a DeMIST handover for trauma and non-trauma patients
Theory Provision of theory on DeMIST and its usage to the participant Theory on DeMIST
De: full name, date of birth/age and sex of the patient
M: trauma or non-trauma
I: injuries found or suspected/complaints
S: Airway, Breathing (frequency, SpO2), Circulation (heart rate, blood pressure), and Disability (EMV-score, pupil reaction, pain, blood glucose)
T: working diagnosis, treatment given, effect of the treatment
When to use DeMIST
How to use DeMIST
Supply of objective information
When to provide a handover
Verification if handover was clear
Who provides a handover to whom (professionals’ role)
Advantages of using the DeMIST in the total chain of emergency care
Knowledge test Summative test whether the participant has sufficient knowledge, insight and basic skills about a DeMIST handover 8 random questions out of 22 on knowledge, insight and application of theory
Simulation test Summative test whether the participant can integrate knowledge and skills to provide a DeMIST handover 2 high fidelity simulation scenarios, randomly picked from 7 possible scenarios:
1. Female (75 yrs), low energetic trauma (pedestrian-car)
2. Male (45 yrs), high energetic trauma (tree-car)
3. Female (28 yrs), hypovolemic shock (fluxus post partum)
4. Male (30 yrs), fever, hypotension altered consciousness (septicaemia)
5. Female (55 yrs), resuscitation
6. Male (68 yrs), resuscitation
7. Female (70 yrs), stroke
Evaluation Feedback on knowledge and simulation test to the participant Achievement on learning goals with feedback