In-person training on COVID-19 case management and infection prevention and control: Evaluation of healthcare professionals in Bangladesh

Abstract

Background As COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic, the major focus of healthcare organizations shifted towards preparing healthcare systems to handle the inevitable COVID-19 burden at different phases and levels. A series of in-person training programs were operated in collaboration with government and partner organizations for the healthcare workers (HCW) of Bangladesh. This study aimed to assess the knowledge of HCWs regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection, their case management, infection prevention and control to fight against the ongoing pandemic. Methods As a part of the National Preparedness and Response Plan for COVID-19 in Bangladesh, the training program was conducted at four district-level hospitals and one specialized hospital in Bangladesh from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021. A total of 755 HCWs participated in the training sessions. Among them, 357 (47%) were enrolled for the evaluation upon completion of the data, collected from one district hospital (Feni) and one specialized hospital (National Institute of Mental Health). Results The mean percentage of pre-test and post-test scores of all the participants were found to be 57% (95% CI 8.34–8.91; p 0.01) and 65% (95% CI 9.56–10.15; p <0.001) respectively. The difference of score (mean) between the groups was significant (p<0.001). After categorizing participants’ knowledge levels as poor, average and fair, doctors’ group has shown to have significant enhancement from level of average to fair compared to that of the nurses. Factors associated with knowledge augmentation of doctors were working in primary health care centers (aOR: 4.22; 95% CI: 1.80, 9.88), job experience less than 5 years (aOR: 4.10; 95% CI: 1.01, 16.63) and experience in caring of family member with COVID-19 morbidity (aOR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.03, 4.10), after adjusting for relevant covariates such as age, sex and prior COVID-19 illness. Conclusion Considering the series of waves of COVID-19 pandemic with newer variants, the present paper underscores the importance of implementing the structured in-person training program on case management, infection prevention and control for the HCWs that may help for successful readiness prior to future pandemics that may further help to minimize the pandemic related fatal consequences.

Monitoring and evaluation practices and operational research during public health emergencies in southeast Asia region (2012–2022) – a systematic review

“…Among the included studies, 25 studies focused on M&E 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 and four studies on OR. 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 Most of the included studies followed a cross-sectional design, whereas two were retrospective studies 29 , 44 and one was a cohort study.…”

“…Apart from those, one viewpoint, 46 one field action report, 47 one perspective, 30 and one policy analysis 36 were included, of which 20 studies were related to COVID-19. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 44 , 45 Table 1 presents the characteristics of the included studies.…”

“… 37 Most of the studies were found to have unclear risk of bias in terms of blinding of outcome assessment. There is a potential risk of detection bias within the studies as maximum studies (n = 25) were assessed as having unclear risk of bias in the blinding of outcome assessments; one study 22 was evaluated as a high risk of bias, while the other 34 had a low risk of bias. Regarding confounding variables, 14 studies were evaluated as having unclear risk of bias and the remaining studies were considered as low risk of bias.…”

“…In total, 20 studies focused on COVID-19. Among these, the highest number of studies were conducted in India (n = 9) 22 , 24 , 25 , 29 , 30 , 32 , 39 , 40 , 45 followed by the number of included studies from Bangladesh (n = 3) 23 , 29 , 34 One was a multi-country study from which we included findings of South Korea and India. 34 M&E conducted in Nepal was reported in two studies 26 , 27 ; and one study from each of the countries of Thailand, 36 Indonesia, 35 and Maldives.…”

“…Among these, the highest number of studies were conducted in India (n = 9) 22 , 24 , 25 , 29 , 30 , 32 , 39 , 40 , 45 followed by the number of included studies from Bangladesh (n = 3) 23 , 29 , 34 One was a multi-country study from which we included findings of South Korea and India. 34 M&E conducted in Nepal was reported in two studies 26 , 27 ; and one study from each of the countries of Thailand, 36 Indonesia, 35 and Maldives. 31 In India, M&E focused on country-level health systems preparedness, surveillance and rapid response, public health (PH) measures taken for infection prevention and control (IPC measure), the process involved in case management, and availability and performance of the health workforce.…”