I was on the train last week on the way to work knowing that my first task of the day was to deliver a lecture on “Creative IPC Issues” to some student nurses. I reviewed the 60-strong slide deck that I’ve run through before and, honestly, my heart sank at the thought of running through them again. If that’s how I was feeling about the session, how could I possibly have delivered effective education? So, slightly impulsively, I threw out the slides and created some interactive scenarios to give an illustration of what it’s like to work in IPC (covering various microbial threats, risk identification and management, staffing challenges, relationship with partners, the regulatory environment, and quality improvement). Whilst I haven’t actually received formal feedback from the group, everybody seemed interested and engaged (in contrast to the previous 60-slide-death-by-powerpoint version!) – and if nothing else, I enjoyed it (which is an important part of delivering effective education.

And so enter today’s study – a survey of almost 2,500 infection prevention practitioners via APIC. The practitioners who were surveyed much preferred impromptu training (like “just in time” training and joining huddles) over planned educational activities. And would choose simulation and interactive activities over death-by-powerpoint presentations and – even worse – the dreaded e-learning!

So if there is such a strong consensus away from presentations and towards simulation and interactive sessions, why do we default to what we like least? I think there’s a couple of possible reasons for this. Simulation or interactive training approaches mean that you will be able to cover less ground than a powerpoint presentation. They also make standardisation more difficult. And the success of the session will most likely be more dependent on the knowledge and experience of the convenor. I also think it takes more effort to create an simulation or interactive session – first, you develop the material, and then you add the simulation / interactive elements.

Overall, I do think that the benefits of moving to simulation or interactive IPC training sessions far outweigh any downsides or challenges.

Finally, a reminder that Prof Martin Kiernan will be leading an IPC Journal Club session on this paper on Wednesday this week (register here).