Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34049907›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2021

Training and education of healthcare workers during viral epidemics: a systematic review.

Leizl Joy Nayahangan, Lars Konge, Lene Russell, Steven Andersen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Retention of Knowledge and Efficacy of a Hands-on Training Session in Oxygen Therapy for COVID-19 among Healthcare Workers.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    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

4 authors.

Leizl Joy NayahanganCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Centre for Human Resouces and Education, The Capital Region of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark leizl.joy.nayahangan@regionh.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-6179-1622
Lars KongeCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Centre for Human Resouces and Education, The Capital Region of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lene RussellCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Centre for Human Resouces and Education, The Capital Region of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Steven AndersenCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Centre for Human Resouces and Education, The Capital Region of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is necessary to train a large number of healthcare workers (HCW) within a limited time to ensure adequate human resources during an epidemic. There remains an urgent need for best practices on development and implementation of training programmes.

objectiveTo explore published literature in relation to training and education for viral epidemics as well as the effect of these interventions to inform training of HCW. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches in five databases performed between 1 January 2000 and 24 April 2020 for studies reporting on educational interventions in response to major viral epidemics. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies on educational interventions developed, implemented and evaluated in response to major global viral outbreaks from 2000 to 2020.

participantsHealthcare workers.

interventionsEducational or training interventions. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsDescriptive information were extracted and synthesised according to content, competency category, educational methodology, educational effects and level of educational outcome. Quality appraisal was performed using a criterion-based checklist.

resultsA total of 15 676 records were identified and 46 studies were included. Most studies were motivated by the Ebola virus outbreak with doctors and nurses as primary learners. Traditional didactic methods were commonly used to teach theoretical knowledge. Simulation-based training was used mainly for training of technical skills, such as donning and doffing of personal protective equipment. Evaluation of the interventions consisted mostly of surveys on learner satisfaction and confidence or tests of knowledge and skills. Only three studies investigated transfer to the clinical setting or effect on patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF

findingsThe included studies describe important educational experiences from past epidemics with a variety of educational content, design and modes of delivery. High-level educational evidence is limited. Evidence-based and standardised training programmes that are easily adapted locally are recommended in preparation for future outbreaks.

Indexed as

EpidemicsPersonal Protective EquipmentDisease OutbreaksHealth PersonnelHumansCOVID-19education & training (see medical education & training)medical education & training

Identifiers

PMID34049907
PMCPMC8166630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.