Health worker education during the COVID-19 pandemic: global disruption, responses and lessons for the future-a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis identified early evidence quantifying the disruption to the education of health workers by the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuing policy responses and their outcomes. Following a pre-registered protocol and PRISMA/AMSTAR-2 guidelines, we systematically screened MEDLI...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Human resources for health 2023-02, Vol.21 (1), p.13-13, Article 13
Hauptverfasser: Dedeilia, Aikaterini, Papapanou, Michail, Papadopoulos, Andreas N, Karela, Nina-Rafailia, Androutsou, Anastasia, Mitsopoulou, Dimitra, Nikolakea, Melina, Konstantinidis, Christos, Papageorgakopoulou, Manthia, Sideris, Michail, Johnson, Elizabeth O, Fitzpatrick, Siobhan, Cometto, Giorgio, Campbell, Jim, Sotiropoulos, Marinos G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This systematic review and meta-analysis identified early evidence quantifying the disruption to the education of health workers by the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuing policy responses and their outcomes. Following a pre-registered protocol and PRISMA/AMSTAR-2 guidelines, we systematically screened MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov and Google Scholar from January 2020 to July 2022. We pooled proportion estimates via random-effects meta-analyses and explored subgroup differences by gender, occupational group, training stage, WHO regions/continents, and study end-year. We assessed risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies, RοB2 for randomized controlled trials [RCT]) and rated evidence certainty using GRADE. Of the 171 489 publications screened, 2 249 were eligible, incorporating 2 212 observational studies and 37 RCTs, representing feedback from 1 109 818 learners and 22 204 faculty. The sample mostly consisted of undergraduates, medical doctors, and studies from institutions in Asia. Perceived training disruption was estimated at 71.1% (95% confidence interval 67.9-74.2) and learner redeployment at 29.2% (25.3-33.2). About one in three learners screened positive for anxiety (32.3%, 28.5-36.2), depression (32.0%, 27.9-36.2), burnout (38.8%, 33.4-44.3) or insomnia (30.9%, 20.8-41.9). Policy responses included shifting to online learning, innovations in assessment, COVID-19-specific courses, volunteerism, and measures for learner safety. For outcomes of policy responses, most of the literature related to perceptions and preferences. More than two-thirds of learners (75.9%, 74.2-77.7) were satisfied with online learning (postgraduates more than undergraduates), while faculty satisfaction rate was slightly lower (71.8%, 66.7-76.7). Learners preferred an in-person component: blended learning 56.0% (51.2-60.7), face-to-face 48.8% (45.4-52.1), and online-only 32.0% (29.3-34.8). They supported continuation of the virtual format as part of a blended system (68.1%, 64.6-71.5). Subgroup differences provided valuable insights despite not resolving the considerable heterogeneity. All outcomes were assessed as very-low-certainty evidence. The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted health worker education, inflicting a substantial mental health burden on learners. Its impacts on career choices, volunteerism, pedagogical approaches and mental health of learners have implications for educational design, measures to protect and su
ISSN:1478-4491
1478-4491
DOI:10.1186/s12960-023-00799-4