Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32747329›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2020

Effect of an E-Learning Module on Personal Protective Equipment Proficiency Among Prehospital Personnel: Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial.

Laurent Suppan, Mohamed Abbas, Loric Stuby, Philippe Cottet, Robert Larribau, Eric Golay, Anne Iten, Stephan Harbarth, Birgit Gartner, Mélanie Suppan

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Virtual Infection Prevention and Control in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laurent SuppanDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6989-6421
Mohamed Abbas *Infection Control Program and WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7265-1887
Loric Stuby *Genève TEAM Ambulances, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1663-5249
Philippe CottetDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6029-8548
Robert LarribauDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5200-4199
Eric GolayDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7348-470X
Anne ItenInfection Control Program and WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8963-6181
Stephan HarbarthInfection Control Program and WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3551-1025
Birgit GartnerDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0726-3201
Mélanie SuppanDivision of Anesthesiology, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8807-9619
University of Geneva · CHHES-SO Genève · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo avoid misuse of personal protective equipment (PPE), ensure health care workers' safety, and avoid shortages, effective communication of up-to-date infection control guidelines is essential. As prehospital teams are particularly at risk of contamination given their challenging work environment, a specific gamified electronic learning (e-learning) module targeting this audience might provide significant advantages as it requires neither the presence of learners nor the repetitive use of equipment for demonstration.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether a gamified e-learning module could improve the rate of adequate PPE choice by prehospital personnel in the context of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

methodsThis was an individual-level randomized, controlled, quadruple-blind (investigators, participants, outcome assessors, and data analysts) closed web-based trial. All emergency prehospital personnel working in Geneva, Switzerland, were eligible for inclusion, and were invited to participate by email in April 2020. Participants were informed that the study aim was to assess their knowledge regarding PPE, and that they would be presented with both the guidelines and the e-learning module, though they were unaware that there were two different study paths. All participants first answered a preintervention quiz designed to establish their profile and baseline knowledge. The control group then accessed the guidelines before answering a second set of questions, and were then granted access to the e-learning module. The e-learning group was shown the e-learning module right after the guidelines and before answering the second set of questions.

resultsOf the 291 randomized participants, 176 (60.5%) completed the trial. There was no significant difference in baseline knowledge between groups. Though the baseline proportion of adequate PPE choice was high (75%, IQR 50%-75%), participants' description of the donning sequence was in most cases incorrect. After either intervention, adequate choice of PPE increased significantly in both groups (P<.001). Though the median of the difference in the proportion of correct answers was slightly higher in the e-learning group (17%, IQR 8%-33% versus 8%, IQR 8%-33%), the difference was not statistically significant (P=.27). Confidence in the ability to use PPE was maintained in the e-learning group (P=.27) but significantly decreased in the control group (P=.04).

conclusionsAmong prehospital personnel with an already relatively high knowledge of and experience with PPE use, both web-based study paths increased the rate of adequate choice of PPE. There was no major added value of the gamified e-learning module apart from preserving participants' confidence in their ability to correctly use PPE.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInfection ControlMalePandemicsPersonal Protective EquipmentPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2TelemedicinecommunicationCOVID-19electronic learningequipmentgamifiedonline learningpersonal protective equipmentprehospitalprotectionrandomized controlled trialsafety

Identifiers

PMID32747329
PMCPMC7446759
OpenAlexW3047215696

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.