European Network for Harmonisation of Training in Haematology

2. Hematology as EU recognised specialty European Network for Harmonisation of Training in Haematology

3. Hematology as EU recognised specialty Network of European linkers CME for Hematology Curriculum passport European Network for Harmonisation of Training in Haematology

4. October 2011 Existing education Master Class Policy Portfolio Education strategy October 2008 Survey European Network for Harmonisation of Training in Haematology

5. European Network for Harmonisation of Training in Haematology Professional Mobility

6. How? Mentor & Mentee (1:5) 5 Groups

7. How? Mentor & Mentee (1:5) 5 Groups Mentor as Facilitator 5 Clinical case studies in ~4 week blocks Remote learning NING/Confolio/ Elluminate Web discussions & shared learning Feedback from Case author

8. How? • Each group a mix of nationalities • Initial face-to-face meet at EHA Congress • Study material: • Thrombosis Haemostasis • Malignant Haematology • Laboratory Diagnostics • Red cell disorder • Transfusion Medicine

9. How? Based on real complex cases Divided into weekly slide sets Questions designed to stimulate discussion Groups produced reports Case author review and feedback online (recorded)

10. Timetable

13. Case 1: Thrombosis & Haemostasis • Commenced 6th September 2010 • Weekly materials posted on Sunday evenings • Two points for group reports: 19th September and 17th October • As of 14th September 2010: 4/25 mentees have not yet contributed to discussion http://h-net2010.ning.com/

14. Google Analytics (14.09.10)

16. Evaluation • Baseline Questionnaire to mentors/mentees at initial face-to-face meeting • Monitoring of discussions • Short questionnaire following first case • Final questionnaire to mentees, mentors and case authors Aim: To gather data on Quality of experience, Quality of learning and Resource level required.

17. Evaluation25 mentees: 2 discontinued; 19 responses How much time spent per week? 18: demands on time about right and as expected 1: more than expected and too much

18. Degree of Difficulty? Haemostasis & Thrombosis Too difficult 2 About right 17 Too easy 0 “A very interesting activity, with complications...”, “at this topic there are many gray zones, so a lot to interpret”, “particularly interesting the way the case author interpreted differences between guidelines, controversy” Clinical Haematology Too difficult 2 About right 17 Too easy 0 “A difficult clinical case and useful to learn”, “a very rare condition...It may be helpful to discuss more frequent diseases but this was again a complex clinical situation, so on the whole, I liked it too” Transfusion Medicine Too difficult 4 About right 13 Too easy 1 “Basic things we should practice”; “during the haematology training we do not spend many hours in this field”

19. Peer-group Learning? 17said they had learned from other group members: “Yes indeed! In some cases we have had different treatment traditions in different countries, which has been very interesting to discover. We have had different strong areas of knowledge...” “Indeed so, when it comes to supplying knowledge with new literature, I’ll try to set up a journal-club in the dept.” “I really admire [X] and [Y]. They really push the group. Their reports are concise and well supported. I enjoy reading their comments.” “Yes, we always learn something from the others” “...the idea of group working also makes it more entertaining” 1did not feel they had learned from the group: “Not as much as I had hoped”

20. General comments “It is very helpful for me, ............our team work is not as good as I expected” “...it pushes me to read a lot more articles than I normally do...a very nice way to learn! We also make friends that are nice to keep” “Very interesting, but again the time factor is the main issue” “I loved this opportunity” “I am satisfied with the program. Partly I feel disappointed because we could have much better group work if we had shared tasks more” “I think it is a very good experience, we learn about it and we have an active and friendly relationship with the other members of the team.” ...”I find the program much more interesting and useful than I expected,...the idea of group working makes it more entertaining”

21. Mentor’s role “Our mentor has had a quite “Drawn-back”, not so active role. This is mainly because we have been pretty much on track by ourselves...once, when we were tired and stressed, and didn’t restart the discussion on a new case within the first week, he sent a mail to ask if we were still alive, and this was enough to get us going again...” “It seemed to me that he tried to stay always in the background, but watched our work and made comments if it was needed. He encouraged us. It was helpful to know that an expert is supporting our work” “He suggested the way of thinking if we needed help and commented our reports” “I think the mentor should comment our answers every week and correct them” “I like him, although we don’t hear from him often”

22. Summary of Evaluation 23/25 participants active Case authors: Standard of learning has been high Highly positive experience Multiple technology tools: not an issue

23. Summary of Evaluation • 23/25 participants active • Case authors: Standard of learning has been high • Highly positive experience • Multiple technology tools: not an issue • Mentor’s role: valuable but not onerous • Trainees appreciate opportunity to develop warm professional networks How? When? Where?

24. Conclusion Novel teaching method • Peer group learning from a distance • Little interference • Observance & Guidance • Self-respect and self-control • Last minute reports • Absences