Training activity information
Details
Review monitoring data to ensure operating within safe limits and make recommendation for actions where required for:
- Heated stages
- Incubators
- Liquid nitrogen dewars
- Tube warmers
Type
Entrustable training activity (ETA)
Evidence requirements
Evidence the activity has been undertaken by the trainee repeatedly, consistently, and effectively over time, in a range of situations. This may include occasions where the trainee has not successfully achieved the outcome of the activity themselves. For example, because it was not appropriate to undertake the task in the circumstances or the trainees recognised their own limitations and sought help or advice to ensure the activity reached an appropriate conclusion.
Reflection at multiple timepoints on the trainee learning journey for this activity.
Considerations
- Measurements taken to assess parameters directly affecting embryo quality and the implications of exceeding tolerance limits
- Environmental variables, such as temperature and CO2, and their impact on sample viability
- Identification of common faults and remedial action
- Quality management system
- Monitoring system and call out system for 24/7 monitoring
- Uninterruptable power supply (UPS) requirements for critical equipment
- Role in maintaining patient safety
Reflective practice guidance
The guidance below is provided to support reflection at different time points, providing you with questions to aid you to reflect for this training activity. They are provided for guidance and should not be considered as a mandatory checklist. Trainees should not be expected to provide answers to each of the guidance questions listed.
Before action
What does success look like?
- Identify what is expected of you in relation to reviewing monitoring data from heated stages, incubators, liquid nitrogen dewars, and tube warmers.
- Consider how the learning outcomes apply, specifically in relation to practicing in accordance with quality management and regulatory standards and demonstrating safe and effective practice, minimising risk.
- Discuss with your Training Officer to gain clarity of what is expected of you in relation to the specific expected safe operating limits for this equipment and what types of recommendations are expected.
What is your prior experience of this activity?
- Think about what you already know about monitoring laboratory equipment or interpreting data logs.
- Consider possible challenges you might face during the activity, such as identifying trends, recognising out-of-limit values, or determining the root cause of an issue.
- Recognise the scope of your own practice for this activity i.e. know when you will need to seek advice or help, and from whom. You will need to seek advice from your Training Officer when required, for example, if an out-of-limit value is identified and requires escalation or specific troubleshooting.
- Acknowledge how you feel about the responsibility of monitoring critical equipment data.
What do you anticipate you will learn from the experience?
- Consider the specific skills you want to develop, such as data review, interpretation, or troubleshooting equipment issues based on monitoring data.
- Identify the specific insights you hope to gain into how equipment performance directly impacts the culture environment and the viability of gametes/embryos.
What additional considerations do you need to make?
- Consult actions identified following previous experiences of equipment monitoring or data review.
- Identify important information you need to consider before embarking on the activity, such as acceptable ranges for each parameter, standard operating procedures for monitoring, or escalation protocols for out-of-limit readings.
In action
Is anything unexpected occurring?
- Are you noticing anything surprising or different from what you anticipate whilst reviewing the monitoring data (e.g., incubator temperature, CO2 levels)?
- Are you encountering situations such as:
- A monitored parameter is outside the defined safe limit?
- You identify a worrying trend or unusual fluctuation even if the current reading is still within acceptable limits?
How are you reacting to the unexpected development?
- How is this impacting your actions? For example, are you responding to the situation appropriately? Are you immediately responding or thinking about potential actions (e.g., investigating the root cause) based on the out-of-limit reading?
- Consider the steps you are taking in the moment, such as immediately checking peripheral monitoring logs or formulating a potential recommendation for action.
- How are you feeling in that moment? For instance, are you finding it difficult to determine the root cause of the data deviation? Is it affecting your confidence in formulating an appropriate action plan?
What is the conclusion or outcome?
- Identify how you are working within your scope of practice. For example, were you able to implement standard troubleshooting measures and stabilise the parameter, or make a factual note of the deviation? Or are you needing support because an out-of-limit value is identified and requires escalation or specific troubleshooting?
- What are you learning as a result of the unexpected development? For example, are you gaining insight into troubleshooting equipment issues based on monitoring data or recognising the criticality of trend analysis?
On action
What happened?
- Begin by summarising the key steps you took when reviewing monitoring data (e.g., temperature logs, CO2 levels).
- Consider specific events, actions, or interactions which felt important, such as identifying a reading close to or outside the safe limits.
- Include any ‘reflect-in-action’ moments where you had to adapt to the situation as it unfolded, for instance, immediately checking peripheral monitoring logs upon spotting an unusual trend.
- How did you feel during this experience, e.g., aware of the responsibility of monitoring critical equipment data?
How has this experience contributed to your developing practice?
- Identify what learning you can take from this experience regarding reviewing monitoring data and identifying deviations from safe limits. What strengths did you demonstrate, e.g., systematic approach to data review and comparison against safe limits?
- What skills and/or knowledge gaps were evident, e.g., unfamiliarity with interpreting data patterns from a less familiar piece of equipment?
- Compare this experience against previous engagement with similar activities – were any previously identified actions for development achieved? Has your practice improved in formulating appropriate recommendations for action?
- Identify any challenges you experienced, such as difficulty in accessing or interpreting the data, and how you reacted to this. This might include needing to seek advice or clarification on scope of practice regarding escalating a critical finding, and how you reacted to this.
What will you take from the experience moving forward?
- Identify the actions or ‘next steps’ you will now take to support the assimilation of what you have learnt, including from any feedback you have received, with regards to improving the structure and confidence in formulating recommendations for action.
- What will you do differently next time you approach monitoring data review, for instance, by proactively implementing a standardised checklist for trend analysis in incubator monitoring?
- Do you need to practise any aspect of the activity further, such as reviewing data for a less familiar piece of equipment or key learning outcomes related to demonstrating safe and effective practice.
Beyond action
Have you revisited the experiences?
- How have your subsequent experiences of monitoring key equipment data for incubators and dewars since completing this specific training activity led you to revisit your initial approach or decisions during that activity? For example, how an instance where a subsequent emergency incubator failure requiring rapid data analysis and decision-making forced you to re-evaluate the speed and efficiency of your initial data review and anomaly identification during your first attempt at this training activity.
- Considering what you understand about critical operating parameters, quality control and troubleshooting equipment validation now, were the actions or considerations you identified after your initial reflection on this training activity sufficient? How have you since implemented or adapted improvements in your routine data checks and anomaly identification methodology based on further learning and experiences? For example, how you proactively integrated observable behaviours and practices related to routine data checks and identifying potential issues based on further learning.
- Has discussing equipment management or quality assurance processes or the implications of parameter deviations with colleagues, peers, or supervisors changed how you now view your initial experience in this training activity? For example, how professional storytelling with a senior colleague about a near-miss due to an incubator drift refined your understanding of the critical nature of proactive trend analysis and problem identification.
How have these experiences impacted upon current practice?
- How has the learning from this initial training activity, in combination with subsequent equipment monitoring experiences, contributed to your overall confidence and ability in equipment management and quality control, particularly in preparing for assessments like DOPS or OCEs? For example, how your accumulated skills developed in reviewing data, identifying anomalies, and formulating recommendations now enables you to confidently perform functional equipment checks on workstations and incubators during observed ‘in-person’ assessments.
- How has reflecting back on this specific training activity, combined with everything you’ve learned since, shaped your current approach to equipment function and stability? How does this evolved understanding help you identify when something is beyond your scope of practice or requires escalation? For example, how your evolved approach means you now routinely seek advice from your Training Officer immediately if an out-of-limit value is identified, or if you identify a worrying trend or unusual fluctuation even within acceptable limits, recognising that such equipment issues require escalation for troubleshooting or specific action to maintain quality and minimise risk.
- Looking holistically at your training journey, how has this initial monitoring data review experience, revisited with your current perspective, contributed to your development in meeting the learning outcomes related to practising in accordance with quality management and regulatory standards and demonstrating safe and effective practice, minimising risk? For example, how this foundational experience has supported your development in data analysis, critical evaluation of operational parameters, and proactive identification of risks, contributing directly to maintaining laboratory quality standards.
Relevant learning outcomes
| # | Outcome |
|---|---|
| # 2 |
Outcome
Practice in accordance with quality management and regulatory standards. |
| # 4 |
Outcome
Demonstrate safe and effective practice, minimising risk to all staff and patients. |