1 / 33

42 nd EDTNA/ERCA International C onference Evaluation

42 nd EDTNA/ERCA International C onference Evaluation . General information. 256 Evaluation forms collected overall, response rate is 25,2% (out of 1016 registered participants, excluding accompanying persons and exhibitors) Voluntary approach for evaluation forms

jackie
Download Presentation

42 nd EDTNA/ERCA International C onference Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 42nd EDTNA/ERCA International ConferenceEvaluation

  2. General information • 256 Evaluation forms collected overall, response rate is 25,2% (out of 1016 registered participants, excluding accompanying persons and exhibitors) • Voluntaryapproachforevaluationforms • Increase of the collected questionnaire comparing to last year (16% response rate in 2012) • Participants from 37 countries have submitted their answers • Evaluation is divided into following parts: • Part I – graphs • Part II – evaluation of the „text“ answers • Overall evaluation

  3. PART I.

  4. 2. In whichdiscipline do you work? 280 answers out of 256 questionnaires 3abstain

  5. 3. Are youan EDTNA/ERCA member? 250 answers out of 256 questionnaires 6 abstain 3.1. If no, have you ever been EDTNA/ERCA member? 55 answers out of 256 questionnaires 0 abstain

  6. 4. Did you use simultaneous interpretation in the sessions? 247 answers out of 256 questionnaires 9abstain 66 answers out of 44 YES answers, 4 abstain, someoftherespondentsusedprobablytranslationinto more than 1 language)

  7. 4. …in which language and where you satisfied with the quality? Spanish French 14 answers 9 answers German Czech 2 answers 18 answers

  8. 5. Was EDTNA/ERCA Boothuseful? 230 answers out of 256 questionnaires 30 abstain

  9. 6. Thelenghtofthe Conference was… 245 answers out of 256 questionnaires 11 abstain

  10. 7. The daily scientificprogrammeschedule was… 235 answers out of 256 questionnaires 21 abstain

  11. 8. Was the overal content of the scientificprogrammeinteresting? 245 answers out of 256 questionnaires 11 abstain

  12. 9. Did the programmemeet you expectations? 247 answers out of 256 questionnaires 9abstain

  13. 10. Did you find the CES's scientificprogrammeinteresting? 230 answers out of 256 questionnaires 26 abstain

  14. 10. Did you find the CES's ScientificProgrammeinteresting? Which topic was the best learning tool? 1. FME – High volume HDF 2. Diaverum – Innovation in Vascular Access 3. Amgen - SHPT 4. Baxter - Listening and talking – the roleof the HD nurse Which CES will influence your daily clinical practice? 1. FME – High volume HDF 2. Diaverum – Innovation in Vascular Access 3. Amgen

  15. 11. Were the posters interesting? 237 answers out of 256 questionnaires 19 abstain

  16. 12. Were the oral presentations interesting/informative? 236 answers out of 256 questionnaires 20 abstain

  17. 13. Was the selection of Guest Speakers interesting? 239 answers out of 256 questionnaires 17 abstain

  18. 17. Did you find ConferenceDepartmentstaff helpful? 225 answers out of 256 questionnaires 31 abstain

  19. PART II.

  20. 14. State the session you enjoyed most Most often mentioned sessions: • S 03 – FRESENIUS MEDICAL CARE, Sunday, 1 September • From complex dream to simple reality: HighVolume HDF – the standard therapy of the future. NOW! • Volume matters in haemodiafiltration: HighVolumeHDF improves patient Outcomes, SudhirBowry (Germany) • The future is now: how technological developments make better treatment a reality, Angelika Kneppel (Germany) • S 20 - PARALLEL SESSION Patient education, Monday, 2 September • Patient education in multicultural Malmo, GS: Eva-Lena Nilsson (Sweden) • S 06 – PARALLEL SESSION, Patient empowerment • Adherence and Autonomy, GS: Darren Cawley (Ireland)

  21. 15. State thesession you enjoyed less Most often mentioned sessions: • S 06 – PARALLEL SESSION, Patient empowerment, Sunday, 1 September • O 09 Psychosocial adaptation and social support in haemodialysis patients, Mukadder Mollaoglu (Turkey) • S 15 – PARALLEL SESSION, Home therapies, Sunday, 1 September • O24 Improving patient safety – checklist for haemodialysis, TanjaLonnberg (Finland) There was no session significantly indicated as the least enjoyed session. There were many sessions/abstract mentioned, however just once.

  22. 16. Whattopicswouldyousuggestforfuture Conference? Most often mentioned topics in the questionnaires: • Palliative Care • Prevention and education, practice • Management • PD at home, home dialysis • Catheterinfection and care • Vascular Access • Process of health care or education • Leadership and staff motivation • Transplantation • Adequacy of HD or HDF, High volume HDF On the next slides, there is a long list of other topics mentioned, as all of them might be relevant for you.

  23. 16. Whattopicswouldyousuggestforfuture Conference? Othermentionedtopics in the questionnaires: • Psychological work with patients • Chronic kidney in the elderly • From diabetes to ESRD what, how, how quickly? • Patient involvement in renal care • Development of nurses competencies post-graduate in renal care • Side effects of treatment V symptoms of CKD • Patient self care • Developing self-care • Nursing practices (DOPPS) in general • Peritoneal dialysis • Our patients comes from many cultures/countries, how to manage it. • More about acute patients • Nurse-led advanced practice • Possibility of shortening the H.D. time with acceptable clearance • Hygiene • Sexuality

  24. 16. Whattopicswouldyousuggestforfuture Conference? Most often mentionedtopics in the questionnaires: • Session with all dieticians together at the beginning of conference so that we can discuss with each other about daily features • I would like to make a lecture about supportive care. How to deal with death of chronic patient. And what can we help to the family and the patient who is in the end of life • The influence of emigration people in Europe on depending budget, good or not, and who the country manage with the fact of this • Global perspectives on dialysis / how does Asia/Pacific/USA/Japan manage their CKD/predialysis patterns, introduce not just EU collaborative work but link up with other nations / Asia/Pacific-Australia/USA - these places are also very multicultural • Home HD • Immunosuppression therapy to avert antibody sensitization when potential transplant patients receive a blood transfusion / Transplant exchange donor programmes • Home dialysis, effects of dialysis of the youth, psychological effects on the care given • Dietetic approach to renal care in early CKD states / pre dialysis • Kidney bone disease, Nutrition • More exercise, more children • Alternative Procedures - Plasma Exchange • Evidence based renalcare • Waterfor HD • The importance of education for nurses about psychological aspects to cope with pension. Bring alternative treatment to HD patients. • The influence of educational session nursing to patients. The importance of the organic food in health

  25. 16. Whattopicswouldyousuggestforfuture Conference? Most often mentionedtopics in the questionnaires: • General Nephrology • Training staff for further education • Participant education / improvement communication • End of life • Professional development • Diet for poor countries (as for the calcium and phosphorus) • Autonomy of chronic patients in their daily life in the dialysis unit • Education and CKD prevention • Innovations in different fields of interest, recourse optimalization at hospitals/clinics… • Peritoneal dialysis, economical aspects • More at button hole communication • Organ donation • Improving quality of life education of patient in pre-dialysis clinic and immediately after start • Psychological impact on dialysis nurses in a satellite unit • Gender nephrology - gender medicine

  26. 18. In what ways could this Conference be improved? Most often mentioned comments: • More translation into Russian, Slovenian • Bad English level of some speakers • Bigger rooms • The venue was not good for exhibition/posters • Poster room was small and hidden, too far from the exhibition • More healthyfood • More food

  27. 19. What did you like most or like least about the industry exhibition? + • Helpful staff and personal approach • New things, interactive stands • Good competition, variety of exhibitors, • Demonstration of devices • Networking, sharing knowledge • Gambro • Bellco • Vital Access - There were no significant comments to the exhibition, mainly to the venue and conference as such From the few there were relevant following: • Small space, small exhibition • Exhibition in two places • Lunch • No exhibition on the last day • Exhibitors showing the dialysis machines did not know what to do with them, did not give valuable information

  28. 20. AnyotherComments/Views The comments can be divided into following categories: Venue and City: • to find some kind of compromise between the size of the halls • too small Artisten room, toosmall poster area • Malmö – nice city Catering: • Comments on quality of lunches, on the size of the lunch boxes, more staff for lunch distribution Overall: • The conference was in general evaluated as a good and successful with a good organization.

  29. 20. AnyotherComments/Views Other: • I think that Finnish renal community would have lot to give for EDTNA/ERCA international meetings. We have very high quality standards etc. Hopefully we meet in Finland some day! • To arrange posters, posters with same theme to hang together. • Lots of interesting sessions, sometimes mixed with sessions with less interesting subjects. • Poor English for/ from some of the speakers. • Some of the presentations would have been nice if they were longer and not so many short presentations. • Invite more participants from renal technicians. • Bigger social evening • It was very cold in the concert hall. • It is very good that a person, who have renal problem, was invited and hear a patients view. • Pre-dialysis, Disease management limited sessions. • The finish day should be whole day, it is many people that cant be here to the end. • Better time management for short orals, 4 minutes not enough.

  30. OVERALL EVALUATION

  31. Overall evaluation • Most respondents were from United Kingdom, followed by the respondents from Czech Republic and Sweden. • ¾ of the respondents were nurses. • ¾ of the respondents were EDTNA/ERCA members. • Over 90% oftherespondentswere satisfied with: • The CD staff • Conference duration • Daily programme schedule • 2/3 found the EDTNA/ERCA booth useful • ¾ were satisfied with the content of the Scientific Programme and the Conference met their expectations • ¾ found the CES‘s sessions interesting • ¾ found the posters and oral presentations interesting • Translation: thequalityofthetranslationwasrated as a goodquality, howeverthe response ratewasquitelow.

  32. Overall evaluation • The conference was overall evaluated very positive, from the organisational side as well as regarding the content and scientific programme. • The most negative comments were on the small rooms (Artisten) and small and hidden room for posters, on the venue. • The delegates were not very satisfied with the quality of food, they would prefer more fruit instead of chocolate. The lunch boxes were too small. • The delegates complained about the poor level of English of some speakers.

More Related