Strategies for specialty training of healthcare professionals in low-resource settings: a systematic review on evidence from stroke care.
Education
Low-resource
Multidisciplinary
Stroke
Task-shifting
Teaching
Telehealth
Train-the-trainer
Training
Workshop
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Jun 2023
16 Jun 2023
Historique:
received:
24
08
2022
accepted:
06
06
2023
medline:
19
6
2023
pubmed:
17
6
2023
entrez:
16
6
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The greatest mortality and disability from stroke occurs in low- and middle-income countries. A significant barrier to implementation of best stroke care practices in these settings is limited availability of specialized healthcare training. We conducted a systematic review to determine the most effective methods for the provision of speciality stroke care education for hospital-based healthcare professionals in low-resource settings. We followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus for original clinical research articles that described or evaluated stroke care education for hospital-based healthcare professionals in low-resource settings. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and then full text articles. Three reviewers critically appraised the articles selected for inclusion. A total of 1,182 articles were identified and eight were eligible for inclusion in this review; three were randomized controlled trials, four were non-randomized studies, and one was a descriptive study. Most studies used several approaches to education. A "train-the-trainer" approach to education was found to have the most positive clinical outcomes (lower overall complications, lengths of stay in hospital, and clinical vascular events). When used for quality improvement, the "train-the-trainer" approach increased patient reception of eligible performance measures. When technology was used to provide stroke education there was an increased frequency in diagnosis of stroke and use of antithrombotic treatment, reduced door-to-needle times, and increased support for decision making in medication prescription was reported. Task-shifting workshops for non-neurologists improved knowledge of stroke and patient care. Multidimensional education demonstrated an overall care quality improvement and increased prescriptions for evidence-based therapies, although, there were no significant differences in secondary prevention efforts, stroke reoccurrence or mortality rates. The "train the trainer" approach is likely the most effective strategy for specialist stroke education, while technology is also useful if resources are available to support its development and use. If resources are limited, basic knowledge education should be considered at a minimum and multidimensional training may not be as beneficial. Research into communities of practice, led by those in similar settings, may be helpful to develop educational initiatives with relevance to local contexts.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The greatest mortality and disability from stroke occurs in low- and middle-income countries. A significant barrier to implementation of best stroke care practices in these settings is limited availability of specialized healthcare training. We conducted a systematic review to determine the most effective methods for the provision of speciality stroke care education for hospital-based healthcare professionals in low-resource settings.
METHODS
METHODS
We followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus for original clinical research articles that described or evaluated stroke care education for hospital-based healthcare professionals in low-resource settings. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and then full text articles. Three reviewers critically appraised the articles selected for inclusion.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 1,182 articles were identified and eight were eligible for inclusion in this review; three were randomized controlled trials, four were non-randomized studies, and one was a descriptive study. Most studies used several approaches to education. A "train-the-trainer" approach to education was found to have the most positive clinical outcomes (lower overall complications, lengths of stay in hospital, and clinical vascular events). When used for quality improvement, the "train-the-trainer" approach increased patient reception of eligible performance measures. When technology was used to provide stroke education there was an increased frequency in diagnosis of stroke and use of antithrombotic treatment, reduced door-to-needle times, and increased support for decision making in medication prescription was reported. Task-shifting workshops for non-neurologists improved knowledge of stroke and patient care. Multidimensional education demonstrated an overall care quality improvement and increased prescriptions for evidence-based therapies, although, there were no significant differences in secondary prevention efforts, stroke reoccurrence or mortality rates.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The "train the trainer" approach is likely the most effective strategy for specialist stroke education, while technology is also useful if resources are available to support its development and use. If resources are limited, basic knowledge education should be considered at a minimum and multidimensional training may not be as beneficial. Research into communities of practice, led by those in similar settings, may be helpful to develop educational initiatives with relevance to local contexts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37328888
doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04431-w
pii: 10.1186/s12909-023-04431-w
pmc: PMC10273731
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
442Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
JAMA. 2018 Jul 17;320(3):245-254
pubmed: 29959443
Neurology. 2013 Jan 15;80(3 Suppl 2):S5-12
pubmed: 23319486
J Interprof Care. 2011 Mar;25(2):91-7
pubmed: 20795828
Neurol India. 2016 Sep-Oct;64(5):934-40
pubmed: 27625232
J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2021 Apr;12(2):356-361
pubmed: 33927525
Nat Rev Neurol. 2021 Mar;17(3):127-128
pubmed: 33452494
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Aug 01;76(8):932-941
pubmed: 31058947
Eur J Neurol. 2009 Sep;16(9):998-1003
pubmed: 19486134
Int J Stroke. 2019 Jul;14(5):500-507
pubmed: 30040047
Stroke Res Treat. 2018 Nov 27;2018:3238165
pubmed: 30598741
J Eval Clin Pract. 2021 Apr;27(2):291-306
pubmed: 32424823
Lancet Neurol. 2012 Apr;11(4):341-8
pubmed: 22441195
Implement Sci Commun. 2022 Mar 10;3(1):27
pubmed: 35272705
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Feb 2;17(1):108
pubmed: 28153014
Cardiovasc J Afr. 2015 Mar-Apr;26(2 Suppl 1):S27-38
pubmed: 25962945
Front Neurol. 2019 Aug 07;10:856
pubmed: 31447769
Health Expect. 2020 Apr;23(2):450-460
pubmed: 31967387
Int J Stroke. 2009 Apr;4(2):89-93
pubmed: 19383048
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Jul 19;7(7):e13503
pubmed: 31325288
Int J Stroke. 2019 Oct;14(8):803-805
pubmed: 31506027
J Neurol Sci. 2015 Dec 15;359(1-2):112-6
pubmed: 26671098