Impact of armed conflict on health professionals' education and training in Syria: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the holistic impact of the armed conflict on medical education and health professionals' training (MEHPT) in Syria. SETTING: Syria is a country which underwent an armed conflict for 10 years and suffered from the weaponisation of health. METHODS: A mixed-methods systematic review including quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods and textual literature between 2011 and 2021 including papers on the Syrian MEHPT undergraduate and postgraduate education and training personnel (including medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, nursing, midwifery and allied health professionals). The electronic search was conducted in October 2018 in Embase, Global Health, Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and grey literature. And an update to the search was conducted in August 2021 in PubMed, Google Scholar and Trip database. OUTCOMES: The impact of conflict on the MEHPT system, personnel, experiences, challenges and channels of support. RESULTS: Of the 5710 citations screened, 70 met the inclusion criteria (34 quantitative, 3 qualitative, 1 mixed-method, and 32 reports and opinion papers). The two major cross-cutting themes were attacks on MEHPT and innovations (present in 41% and 44% of the papers, respectively), followed by challenges facing the MEHPT sector and attitudes and knowledge of trainees and students, and lastly health system and policy issues, and narrating experiences. CONCLUSION: Conflict in Syria has politicised all aspects of MEHPT. Influenced by political control, the MEHPT system has been divided into two distinguished geopolitical contexts; government-controlled areas (GCAs) and non-GCAs (NGCAs), each having its characteristics and level of war impact. International and regional academic institutes collaboration and coordination efforts are needed to formulate educational platforms using innovative approaches (such as online/blended/store-and-forward/peer-training/online tutoring) to strengthen and build the capacity of the health workforce in conflict-affected areas.

Non-contact infrared versus axillary and tympanic thermometers in children attending primary care: a mixed-methods study of accuracy and acceptability.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend measuring temperature in children presenting with fever using electronic axillary or tympanic thermometers. Non-contact thermometry offers advantages, yet has not been tested against recommended methods in primary care. AIM: To compare two different non-contact infrared thermometers (NCITs) to axillary and tympanic thermometers in children aged ≤5 years visiting their GP with an acute illness. DESIGN AND SETTING: Method comparison study with nested qualitative component. METHOD: Temperature measurements were taken with electronic axillary (Welch Allyn SureTemp®), electronic tympanic (Braun Thermoscan®), NCIT Thermofocus® 0800, and NCIT Firhealth Forehead. Parents rated acceptability and discomfort. Qualitative interviews explored parents' experiences of the thermometers. RESULTS: In total, 401 children were recruited (median age 1.6 years, 50.62% male). Mean difference between the Thermofocus NCIT and axillary thermometer was -0.14°C (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.21 to -0.06°C); lower limit of agreement was -1.57°C (95% CI = -1.69 to -1.44°C) and upper limit 1.29°C (95% CI = 1.16 to 1.42°C). A second NCIT (Firhealth) had similar levels of agreement; however, the limits of agreement between tympanic and axillary thermometers were also wide. Parents expressed a preference for the practicality and comfort of NCITs, and were mostly negative about their child's experience of axillary thermometers. But there was willingness to adopt whichever device was medically recommended. CONCLUSION: In a primary care paediatric population, temperature measurements with NCITs varied by >1°C compared with axillary and tympanic approaches. But there was also poor agreement between tympanic and axillary thermometers. Since clinical guidelines often rely on specific fever thresholds, clinicians should interpret peripheral thermometer readings with caution and in the context of a holistic assessment of the child.