Undergraduate Education in Lancashire Care           

Background:

Lancashire Care Foundation Trust provides mental health placements for medical students from Manchester, Lancaster and Liverpool Medical Schools).  Students are posted to 5 main sites within the Trust: Liverpool students are posted to West LCFT (Blackpool and Ormskirk) while Lancaster Students are posted to North LCFT (Lancaster), Manchester Medical School students are posted mainly to Central and East LCFT (Preston, Chorley, Burnley and Blackburn).  Historically, the numbers of students posted from Manchester and Liverpool were quite small and were concentrated in Preston and Blackpool respectively.  However, the numbers have increased significantly in the last 5 years. 

Each medical School has an individual curriculum, so all aspects of the delivery of medical education differ depending on the respective medical school, this includes QA and feedback systems.

Manchester students are posted for their Psychiatry placements in the 4th year of their course.  Feedback is via Quality Assurance meetings that occur at the end of each placement involving the Acute Trust Education Dept, LCFT and Manchester Medical School.

Lancaster students are posted for their Psychiatry placements in the 3rd and 4th years of their course. The feedback is done directly to the Medical School and then copies collated and sent to LCFT

Liverpool students are posted during the 4th year of their course to LCFT placements in Blackpool and Ormskirk. The feedback is sent to the Medical School and Blackpool Victoria Hospital Undergraduate Department.

For the purpose of brevity, I have selected a mix of comments representative of the student’s feedback. Overall, the feedback suggests the psychiatry placements across LCFT are excellent, but not all students enjoy the placements, so I have included some negative comments to give a flavour of the less favourable comments students have made.

Whilst this is to ensure all aspects of feedback are included, this doesn’t represent a balanced view, the vast majority of feedback is extremely positive. All the feedback can be made available if required.

Awards:

2010/11: University of Liverpool:         Excellence in Teaching Award:     Nick Mullin
2014/15: University of Manchester:    Best Non-consultant Teacher:   Gareth Thomas 
2014/15: University of Manchester:    Best Year 4 PBL Facilitator:       Simon Belderbos

Manchester Graduate Feedback:

Module 1 Group 1 (Score 4.5/5):

“This was an excellent and well organised placement” 
“To summarise, the group highlighted how helpful Kate had been throughout the placement.”  
“The students were asked to consider this firm experience and give the placement a score out of 5, 5 being excellent. The average score was 4.5”

Module 1 Group 2: (Score 3.9/5)

“Unfortunately one group of students had a poor experience at Charnley Fold. They had waited for an hour for a member of the team to see them, and then they had seemed ill-prepared for the session.”
“Dr Sharda had been great with the group, providing excellent teaching.”
“Mock OSCE is an outstanding idea and should be replicated across other placements.”

Module 1 Group 3 (Score 5/5):

“The mock OSCE had been fantastic and should be replicated by other placement areas.  This had obviously taken a lot of organising and was highly appreciated by the group. The lectures were of good quality, particularly the lecture delivered by Dr Thomas.”
“The group seemed to have enjoyed this placement and were grateful for Kate and Clair’s organisation of the placement, they’d both been so helpful throughout and very responsive to emails etc.  The group felt the feedback system for this firm was the best they’d experienced – despite the various locations; all placement leads were prepared for this and gave detailed feedback.”
“The students were asked to consider this firm experience and give the placement a score out of 5, 5 being excellent. The average score was 5!”
“Forensic - some members of the group had found 2 days was too long.”
“There was however some disappointment from those who’d expressed an interest in attending forensic session that hadn’t been allocated a place.”

Module 2 Group 1 (Score 4.6/5):

“This was an enjoyable placement; Dr Thomas was a very good tutor.”  
“This was very good, with enthusiastic tutors – Dr Sharda, Dr Noblett and Dr Sarah Howley were all praised by the group.“ 
“This was a very good placement, with fantastic teaching from Dr Belderbos”

Module 2 Group 2 (Score 4.5/5):

“This was very good, Dr Han had been fantastic”
“The group seemed to have enjoyed this placement.  Kate had been well organised and helpful, and found Dr Belderbos to be an approachable firm lead, with an infectious enthusiasm for his specialty.”
“PBL had been excellent and Dr Belderbos had been fantastic.”

Module 2 Group 3 (Score 4.5/5):

“Excellent sessions with Dr Rao”
“The teaching programme was valued, all sessions had been useful.”
“Dr Iqbal had been very good at engaging the students”

Liverpool Undergraduate Feedback:

Ormskirk:

Year 4 student feedback on Case Based Learning Sessions on Substance Misuse
Rating from 1 – 10:  Average = 9.7

“Superb – really enjoyed talking over medication to help addiction”
“Excellent knowledge”
“Very good”

Year 4 student feedback on Case Based Learning Sessions on Mood Disorders
Rating from 1 – 10: Average = 10

“Brilliant risk teaching – really helped”
“Good understanding of pharmacology”
“Vastly – clear and gave insightful views with examples”

Year 4 student feedback on Case Based Learning Sessions on Mental Health Act
Rating from 1 – 10: Average = 9.5

“Explained well. I can remember it better”
“Excellent teaching”
“Fun and engaging”

Year 4 student feedback on Case Based Learning Sessions on Psychosis
Rating from 1 – 10: Average = 9.7

“Best teaching I’ve ever had”
“Excellent teaching session. Great examples. Cleared up any ideas/problems”
“Good broad teaching”

Blackpool:

Year 4 student feedback on Individual Learning Objectives
Rating from 1-5 , 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree

Content Rating from 1 – 5:                Average = 4.1
Structure Rating from 1 – 5:              Average = 3.1
Presentation Rating from 1 – 5:       Average = 3.28
Overall Rating from 1 – 5:                 Average = 3.5

“I liked it was short”
“The programme might be improved by incorporating into the main induction”
“I liked going through the objectives”
Comments on Year 4 Psychiatry Rotation
“Great placement, well organised.”
“Very approachable facilitator.”
“Enjoyed the teachings.”
“Most teaching was really fantastic.”
“Overall very good teaching.”
“Some teaching was not as engaging & dictorial, much prefer interaction.”
“Very good, Jane Aldersley was very supportive & flexible.”

Lancaster Undergraduate Feedback:

Year 3: Comments from Feedback Rotation One

“It would have been useful to specify that the RLI group would be based at East barn, but 
would be undertaking placements in the surrounding area, not just at one location.” 
“Not enough books to go round”
“I thought the teaching throughout the rotation was excellent“

Year 3: Comments from Feedback Rotation Two

“Aleisha was very helpful with arranging placements”
“Really enjoyed Nick Mullin's teaching, by far the most informative teacher that we have had in the medical school.”
“Dr Belderbos was an excellent teacher, available when required”
“I think the placements could have been more evenly distributed throughout those on placement at RLI, although I recognise this is difficult”
    
Year 4:  Comments from Groups Sept 2015 – April 2016

  • The timetable kept changing nearly every week which made it difficult to plan things
  • Nick Mullin- role was to organise our time, run PBL and be there if we needed anything or were struggling with something. He was really good
  • Quite repetitive after having 7 weeks of psych in third year
  • Teaching was mostly ward based, which was useful as we had had a number of 'classroom based' teaching sessions in third year, so this year had more opportunity to apply the knowledge we learnt last year. However, we had a case-based discussion on Post-traumatic stress disorder, which was useful, as we hadn't seen anyone with this condition.
  • Overall teaching was good especially at the orchard from all of the doctors.
  • Generally I really enjoyed the rotation
  • Visits to the Harbour
  • Friendly and helpful staff
  • Lots of time on the ward and in different types of wards e.g. The orchard, Calderstones and the harbour
  • Going to Calderstones and Blackpool
  • The doctors at the Orchard involved us in the care of patients, we were a part of team meetings and had plenty of opportunities to discuss cases.


LCFT v Other NW Trusts for student quality of placement

The image above is an example of how Lancaster and Blackpool compared for Liverpool students compared to other Trusts, the figures are how the students were able to clerk and present cases. Out of 9 different Trusts, Lancaster was First and Blackpool second. 

Summary:

Whilst there are areas for improvement and not all feedback has been positive, generally the student feedback about their clinical placements and teaching within LCFT has been excellent.

As well as the obvious awards that several staff have achieved, some of the comments from medical students have been particularly pleasing, from various students, consistently across all of LCFT and referring to numerous different individuals…..

“By far the most informative teacher that we have had in the medical school.”
“Best teaching I’ve ever had”
“Excellent teaching”
“Fantastic teaching”
“This was an excellent and
well organised placement”
              
 

See also: