ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
Competency Assessment on Gram Stain Examination and Interpretation Among Medical Laboratory Professionals Working in Selected Hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Competency Assessment on Gram Stain Examination and Interpretation Among Medical Laboratory Professionals Working in Selected Hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Laboratory test results are the cornerstone for patient diagnosis and treatment. Gram staining is a classic laboratory test method used to differentiate between bacteria. Competence assessment can help identify gaps and provide suggestions to academics, researchers, and policymakers to address competency gaps. In Ethiopia, there is no evidence of competency assessment by medical laboratory professionals using the Gram-staining technique. Objective: To assess the competency of medical laboratory professionals on Gram stain examination and interpretation in selected hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted to assess the competency of medical laboratory professionals on Gram stain examination and interpretation from September 2015 to December 2017. Results: Of 190 participants, 55 (28.9%) participants scored low knowledge, 131 (68.9%) scored medium knowledge, and only 4 (2.1%) respondents scored high knowledge. From the study variables, education level, supervision by regional or federal government bodies, and training about Gram staining were significantly associated with the knowledge level of study participants. Forty eight (25.3%), 78 (41%), and 64 (33.7%) participants scored low, medium, and high skill level, respectively, from a total of 190 participants. From skill level analysis, hospital type, microscope type, and availability of health information resources were significantly associated with skill levels. There were 44 observations (4%) with major errors and 321 observations (28%) with very major errors from all 1140 observations. Of all observations, 321 (28.2%) reported without grading, 39 observations (3.4%) reported gram-positive bacteria as gram-negative bacteria, and 15 observations (1.4%) reported gram-negative bacteria as gram-positive bacteria. Conclusion: The current study found that most medical laboratory professionals work without supervision or refresher training in Gram stain examination and interpretation. Hence, medical laboratory professionals' knowledge and skill levels are unsatisfactory. Regular competence assessments, training, and follow-up are necessary to improve the professional competence in medical laboratories.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.