Upstream USA, Boston, MA, United States.
Upstream USA, Boston, MA, United States.
Contraception. 2022 Aug;112:74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2022.03.019. Epub 2022 Apr 1.
To conduct an exploratory analysis comparing in-person vs. virtual training programs about contraceptive care among clinicians and staff at 14 healthcare agencies in Washington state.
Survey data from in-person trainings were collected between July 2019 and March 2020 and from virtual trainings between June 2020 and January 2021.
changes in contraceptive knowledge, understanding of contraceptive counseling and care, and participant engagement and experience with the training.
Post-survey response rates for in-person trainings were 82% for clinicians and 72% for support staff while post-survey response rates for virtual trainings were 48% for clinicians and 43% for staff. Average knowledge scores for in-person clinician trainings increased from 63% prior to training to 80% post-training (p < 0.05), knowledge scores for virtual clinician trainings increased from 72% to 86% (p < 0.05), and the pre-to-post change in scores between training modalities was similar (p > 0.05 for the score difference). Average knowledge scores among in-person support staff trainings increased from 63% to 84% (p < 0.05), scores among virtual support staff trainings increased from 68% to 87% (p < 0.05) and, again, the pre-to-post change in scores between training modalities was similar (p > 0.05 for the score difference). Only minimal differences in survey scores between modalities were observed on most measures of participant engagement and experience with the trainings (p > 0.05 for most score differences).
These exploratory results suggest that in-person and virtual contraceptive care trainings yielded comparable results among both clinicians and support staff.
Results from this post-hoc analysis of survey data suggest a general equivalency of effectiveness between in-person trainings and virtual trainings, although in-person trainings may be more satisfying or engaging for participants. Further work and research is needed to inform strategies for making virtual trainings more engaging and satisfying for participants.
对华盛顿州 14 家医疗机构的临床医生和工作人员进行现场培训与虚拟培训的对比分析，以了解避孕护理培训。
2019 年 7 月至 2020 年 3 月期间收集现场培训的调查数据，2020 年 6 月至 2021 年 1 月期间收集虚拟培训的调查数据。
避孕知识、避孕咨询和护理理解、参与者参与和培训体验的变化。
现场培训的事后调查回应率为临床医生 82%，支持人员 72%，而虚拟培训的事后调查回应率为临床医生 48%，支持人员 43%。现场临床医生培训的平均知识得分从培训前的 63%增加到培训后的 80%（p<0.05），虚拟临床医生培训的平均知识得分从 72%增加到 86%（p<0.05），培训模式之间的得分变化相似（p>0.05 时差异无统计学意义）。现场支持人员培训的平均知识得分从 63%增加到 84%（p<0.05），虚拟支持人员培训的平均知识得分从 68%增加到 87%（p<0.05），而且培训模式之间的得分变化相似（p>0.05 时差异无统计学意义）。在培训参与度和体验的大多数指标上，两种模式之间的调查得分差异极小（p>0.05 时大多数差异无统计学意义）。
这些探索性结果表明，现场和虚拟避孕护理培训在临床医生和支持人员中产生了类似的结果。
这项对调查数据的事后分析结果表明，现场培训和虚拟培训的效果大致相当，尽管现场培训可能对参与者更有吸引力或更有参与感。需要进一步的工作和研究，为提高虚拟培训对参与者的吸引力和满意度提供策略。
