Health Care Workers' Motivations for Enrolling in Massive Open Online Courses During a Public Health Emergency: Descriptive Analysis.

Background: Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are increasingly used to educate health care workers during public health emergencies. In early 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) developed a series of MOOCs for COVID-19, introducing the disease and strategies to control its outbreak, with 6 courses specifically targeting health care workers as learners. In 2020, Stanford University also launched a MOOC designed to deliver accurate and timely education on COVID-19, equipping health care workers across the globe to provide health care safely and effectively to patients with the novel infectious disease. Although the use of MOOCs for just-in-time training has expanded during the pandemic, evidence is limited regarding the factors motivating health care workers to enroll in and complete courses, particularly in low-income countries (LICs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). Objective: This study seeks to gain insights on the characteristics and motivations of learners turning to MOOCs for just-in-time training, to provide evidence that can better inform MOOC design to meet the needs of health care workers. We examine data from learners in 1 Stanford University and 6 WHO COVID-19 courses to identify (1) the characteristics of health care workers completing the courses and (2) the factors motivating them to enroll. Methods: We analyze (1) course registration data of the 49,098 health care workers who completed the 7 focal courses and (2) survey responses from 6272 course completers. The survey asked respondents to rank their motivations for enrollment and share feedback about their learning experience. We use descriptive statistics to compare responses by health care profession and by World Bank country income classification. Results: Health care workers completed the focal courses from all regions of the world, with nearly one-third (14,159/49,098, 28.84%) practicing in LICs and LMICs. Survey data revealed a diverse range of professional roles among the learners, including physicians (2171/6272, 34.61%); nurses (1599/6272, 25.49%); and other health care professionals such as allied health professionals, community health workers, paramedics, and pharmacists (2502/6272, 39.89%). Across all health care professions, the primary motivation to enroll was for personal learning to improve clinical practice. Continuing education credit was also an important motivator, particularly for nonphysicians and learners in LICs and LMICs. Course cost (3423/6272, 54.58%) and certification (4238/6272, 67.57%) were also important to a majority of learners. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that a diverse range of health care professionals accessed MOOCs for just-in-time training during a public health emergency. Although all health care workers were motivated to improve their clinical practice, different factors were influential across professions and locations. These factors should be considered in MOOC design to meet the needs of health care workers, particularly those in lower-resource settings where alternative avenues for training may be limited.

Comparative Review on the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Relief Teams' Deployment to Sudden-Onset Disasters.

When a disaster exceeds the capacity of the affected country to cope with its own resources, the provision of external rescue and health services is required, and the deployment of relief units requested. Recently, the cost of international relief and the belief that such deployment is cost-effective has been questioned by the international community; unfortunately, there is still little informed debate and few detailed data are available. This paper presents the results of a comparative review on the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of search and rescue (SAR) and Emergency Medical Team (EMT) deployment. The aim of this work is to provide an overview of the topic, highlight the criteria used to assess the effectiveness, and identify gaps in existing literature. The results show that both deployments are highly expensive, and their success is strongly related to the time they need to be operational; SAR deployments are characterized by limited outcomes in terms of lives saved, and EMTs by insufficient data and lack of detailed assessment. This research highlights that the criteria used to assess the effectiveness need to be explored further, considering different purposes, lengths of stay, and different activities performed, especially for any comparison. This study concludes that data reporting should be mandatory for humanitarian response agencies.

A literature review of medical record keeping by foreign medical teams in sudden onset disasters.

BACKGROUND: Medical records are a tenet of good medical practice and provide one method of communicating individual follow-up arrangements, informing research data, and documenting medical intervention. METHODS: The objective of this review was to look at one source (the published literature) of medical records used by foreign medical teams (FMTs) in sudden onset disasters (SODs). The published literature was searched systematically for evidence of what medical records have been used by FMTs in SODs. Findings The style and content of medical records kept by FMTs in SODs varied widely according to the published literature. Similarly, there was great variability in practice as to what happens to the record and/or the data from the record following its use during a patient encounter. However, there was a paucity of published work comprehensively detailing the exact content of records used. Interpretation Without standardization of the content of medical records kept by FMTs in SODs, it is difficult to ensure robust follow-up arrangements are documented. This may hinder communication between different FMTs and local medical teams (LMTs)/other FMTs who may then need to provide follow-up care for an individual. Furthermore, without a standard method of reporting data, there is an inaccurate picture of the work carried out. Therefore, there is not a solid evidence base for improving the quality of future response to SODs. Further research targeting FMTs and LMTs directly is essential to inform any development of an internationally agreed minimum data set (MDS), for both recording and reporting, in order that FMTs can reach the World Health Organization (WHO) standards for FMT practice.