Evaluation of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosives (CBRNE) Knowledge Change and Skills Confidence Among Frontline-Line Providers During the Russia-Ukraine War.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the change in knowledge and skill confidence after implementation of a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE) training course during the Russia-Ukraine War. METHODS: Pre/post-test study in the Ukrainian cities of Kyiv, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, and Odesa. Fifteen CBRNE courses were conducted over a 3-mo period, August to October 2022. Change in knowledge and skills confidence were evaluated with pre/post-course written exams and practical skill assessments that were observed during the training exercises. Changes were analyzed based on nonparametric Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank testing. Pre/post self-efficacy surveys were analyzed with McNemar's test for paired data. Course evaluations were conducted with standardized questions which assessed instruction quality, teaching relevance, knowledge gained, and post-course skills confidence. RESULTS: A total of 523 participants registered and completed 1 of the 15 courses. Overall mean pre-course test score: 57.8% (SD 20.7%); mean post-course test score: 81.4% (SD 11.3%); participants with increasing test scores: 90.7%; mean difference in score (95% confidence interval) 23.6% (21.2%-25.9%), P < 0.0001. Pre/post self-efficacy surveys (4-point Likert scale) noted participants recognized signs and symptoms of a CBRNE incident, and necessary skills to manage CBRNE exposures, P < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of this CBRNE course for front-line providers in Ukraine was successful. To our knowledge, it was the first implementation of a field course during the current Russian-Ukraine war. Future research should evaluate knowledge retention and impact of our innovative Train-the-Trainer model. Further iterations should emphasize expanding the quantity of training equipment and practical skill sessions.

A systematic review of acute and emergency care interventions for adolescents and adults with severe acute respiratory infections including COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries.

Background: Severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) remain a leading cause of death globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Early intervention is critical, considering the potential for rapid decompensation in patients with SARIs. We aimed to evaluate the impact of acute and emergency care interventions on improving clinical outcomes in patients >10 years old with SARIs in LMICs. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Global Health, and Global Index Medicus databases to identify peer-reviewed studies containing SARI, LMICs, and emergency care interventions. Studies published prior to November 2020 focusing on patients >10 years old were included. A narrative synthesis was performed due to the heterogeneity of identified articles. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 and Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results: 20 223 studies were screened and 58 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-four studies focused on coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19), 15 on pneumonia, seven on influenza, one study on severe acute respiratory syndrome, and one on undifferentiated SARI. Few COVID-19 studies found a benefit of the tested intervention on clinical status, mortality, or hospital length-of-stay. Little to no benefit was found for azithromycin, convalescent plasma, or zinc, and potential harm was found for hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine. There was mixed evidence for immunomodulators, traditional Chinese medicine, and corticosteroids among COVID-19 studies, with notable confounding due to a lack of consistency of control group treatments. Neuraminidase inhibitor antivirals for influenza had the highest quality of evidence for shortening symptom duration and decreasing disease severity. Conclusions: We found few interventions for SARIs in LMICs with have high-quality evidence for improving clinical outcomes. None of the included studies evaluated non-pharmacologic interventions or were conducted in low-income countries. Further studies evaluating the impact of antivirals, immunomodulators, corticosteroids, and non-pharmacologic interventions for SARIs in LMICs are urgently needed. Registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020216117.

Comparative Effectiveness of an In-Person and a Virtual Basic Emergency Care Instructor Course.

Background: Resource limited settings have an ongoing need for access to quality emergency care. The World Health Organization - International Committee of the Red Cross Basic Emergency Care (BEC) course is one mechanism to address this need. Training of BEC trainers has been challenging due to barriers including cost, travel logistics, scheduling, and more recently, social distancing regulations related to the coronavirus pandemic. Objective: We seek to determine if an online virtual format is an effective way to train additional trainers while overcoming these barriers. Methods: The BEC Training-of-Trainers (ToT) course was adapted to a virtual format and delivered entirely online. Participants were assessed with a multiple choice pre- and post-test and completed a course feedback form upon completion. Results from the virtual course were then compared to the results from an in-person ToT course. Findings: The in-person course pre- and post-tests were completed by 121 participants with a pre-test mean of 87% (range 60-100%) and a post-test mean of 95% (range: 75-100; p < 0.05). Virtual course pre- and post-tests by 27 participants were analyzed with a pre-test mean of 89% (range 75-100%) and a post-test mean of 96% (range: 79-100; p < 0.05). No difference in test improvements between the courses was detected (z = -0.485; p = 0.627). The course feedback was completed by 93 in-person participants and 28 virtual participants. Feedback survey responses were similar for all questions except for course length, with in-person participant responses trending towards the course being too long. Conclusions: A virtual format BEC ToT course is effective, feasible, and acceptable. When compared to an in-person course, no difference was detected in nearly all metrics for the virtual format. Utilizing this format for future courses can assist in scaling both the BEC ToT and, by extension, the BEC course globally, particularly in regions facing barriers to in-person training.

Global emergency medicine: A scoping review of the literature from 2020.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to identify, screen, highlight, review, and summarize some of the most rigorously conducted and impactful original research (OR) and review articles (RE) in global emergency medicine (EM) published in 2020 in the peer-reviewed and gray literature. METHODS: A broad systematic search of peer-reviewed publications related to global EM indexed on PubMed and in the gray literature was conducted. The titles and abstracts of the articles on this list were screened by members of the Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) Group to identify those that met our criteria of OR or RE in the domains of disaster and humanitarian response (DHR), emergency care in resource-limited settings (ECRLS), and EM development. Those articles that met these screening criteria were then scored using one of three scoring templates appropriate to the article type. Those articles that scored in the top 5% then underwent in-depth narrative summarization. RESULTS: The 2020 GEMLR search initially identified 35,970 articles, more than 50% more than last year's search. From these, 364 were scored based on their full text. Nearly three-fourths of the scored articles constituted OR, of which nearly three-fourths employed quantitative research methods. Nearly 10% of the articles identified this year were directly related to COVID-19. Research involving ECRLS again constituted most of the articles in this year's review, accounting for more than 60% of the literature scored. A total of 20 articles underwent in-depth narrative critiques. CONCLUSIONS: The number of studies relevant to global EM identified by our search was very similar to that of last year. Revisions to our methodology to identify a broader range of research were successful in identifying more qualitative research and studies related to DHR. The number of COVID-19-related articles is likely to continue to increase in subsequent years.

Humanitarian Training With Virtual Simulation During a Pandemic.

There is an ongoing and established need for humanitarian training and professionalization. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted training programs designed to accomplish this goal, including the Humanitarian Response Intensive Course, which includes a 3-d immersive simulation to prepare humanitarian workers for future field work. To provide program continuity, the 3-d simulation was quickly adapted to a virtual format using a combination of video conferencing, short messaging service, and cloud-based file storage software. Participants were geographically dispersed and participated virtually. Learning objectives were preserved, while some components not amenable to a virtual format were removed.A virtual humanitarian training simulation is a feasible, acceptable, and affordable alternative to an in-person simulation. Participants were engaged and experienced minimal technological disruptions. The majority of students believed the format met or exceeded expectations. However, feedback also emphasized the importance of providing sufficient time for team collaboration and deliverable preparation in the simulation schedule. The virtual format was more affordable than the traditional in-person simulation, and diverse expert faculty who could not have attended in-person were able to participate. This format could be used to overcome other barriers to in-person simulation training, including geographic, financial, time, or security.

COVID-19 Pandemic Prompts a Paradigm Shift in Global Emergency Medicine: Multidirectional Education and Remote Collaboration.

To date, the practice of global emergency medicine (GEM) has involved being "on the ground" supporting in-country training of local learners, conducting research, and providing clinical care. This face-to-face interaction has been understood as critically important for developing partnerships and building trust. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought significant uncertainty worldwide, including international travel restrictions of indeterminate permanence. Following the 2020 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine meeting, the Global Emergency Medicine Academy (GEMA) sought to enhance collective understanding of best practices in GEM training with a focus on multidirectional education and remote collaboration in the setting of COVID-19. GEMA members led an initiative to outline thematic areas deemed most pertinent to the continued implementation of impactful GEM programming within the physical and technologic confines of a pandemic. Eighteen GEM practitioners were divided into four workgroups to focus on the following themes: advances in technology, valuation, climate impacts, skill translation, research/scholastic projects, and future challenges. Several opportunities were identified: broadened availability of technology such as video conferencing, Internet, and smartphones; online learning; reduced costs of cloud storage and printing; reduced carbon footprint; and strengthened local leadership. Skills and knowledge bases of GEM practitioners, including practicing in resource-poor settings and allocation of scarce resources, are translatable domestically. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated a paradigm shift in the practice of GEM, identifying a previously underrecognized potential to both strengthen partnerships and increase accessibility. This time of change has provided an opportunity to enhance multidirectional education and remote collaboration to improve global health equity.

Agile Application of Digital Health Interventions during the COVID-19 Refugee Response.

The intersection of digital health platforms and refugee health in the context of the novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has not yet been explored. We discuss the ability of a novel mobile health (mhealth) platform to be effectively adapted to improve health access for vulnerable displaced populations. In a preliminary analysis of 200 Syrian refugee women, we found positive user feedback and uptake of an mhealth application to increase access to preventive maternal and child health services for Syrian refugees under temporary protection in Turkey. Rapid adaptation of this application was successfully implemented during a global pandemic state to perform symptomatic assessment, disseminate health education, and bolster national prevention efforts. We propose that mhealth interventions can provide an innovative, cost-effective, and user-friendly approach to access the dynamic needs of refugees and other displaced populations, particularly during an emerging infectious disease outbreak.