| Literature DB >> 26501051 |
April Johnson1, Gulshan Akhundova2, Saida Aliyeva3, Lisa Strelow4.
Abstract
A training program for animal and human health professionals has been implemented in Azerbaijan through a joint agreement between the United States Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the Government of Azerbaijan. The training program is administered as part of the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program, and targets key employees in Azerbaijan's disease surveillance system including physicians, veterinarians, epidemiologists, and laboratory personnel. Training is aimed at improving detection, diagnosis, and response to especially dangerous pathogens (EDPs), although the techniques and methodologies can be applied to other pathogens and diseases of concern. Biosafety and biosecurity training is provided to all trainees within the program. Prior to 2014, a variety of international agencies and organizations provided training, which resulted in gaps related to lack of coordination of training materials and content. In 2014 a new training program was implemented in order to address those gaps. This paper provides an overview of the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program training program in Azerbaijan, a description of how the program fits into existing national training infrastructure, and an evaluation of the new program's effectiveness to date. Long-term sustainability of the program is also discussed.Entities:
Keywords: Azerbaijan; Cooperative Biological Engagement Program; Ministry of Agriculture; Ministry of Health; training
Year: 2015 PMID: 26501051 PMCID: PMC4598800 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00228
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Especially Dangerous Pathogens (EDPs) covered in the CBEP training program.
| Capripox virus Newcastle disease virus African swine fever virus Classical swine fever virus Foot and mouth disease virus | Avian influenza virus |
Total number of MoH and SVCS co-trainers active in the program as of April 2015.
| Clinical recognition | 2 | 2 |
| Epidemiology | 3 | 4 |
| Bacteriology | 3 | 3 |
| Serology | 2 | 3 |
| PCR | 3 | 3 |
| Biosafety and biosecurity | 2 | 2 |
| Total | 15 | 17 |
Figure 1Clinical training evaluation by trainees (. Note that no responses were marked as poor or below average so those categories are not shown.
Figure 2Trainee feedback on Clinical trainer knowledge and skills (. The number of N/A responses to these questions is not shown.
Figure 3Epidemiology training evaluation by trainees (. Note that no responses were marked as poor or below average so those categories are not shown.
Figure 4Trainee feedback on Epidemiology trainer knowledge and skills (. The number of N/A responses to these questions is not shown.
Figure 5Laboratory training evaluation by trainees (. Note that no responses were marked as poor or below average so those categories are not shown.
Figure 6Trainee feedback on Laboratory trainer knowledge and skills (. The number of N/A responses to these questions is not shown.
Median pre- and post-test scores for training events between September 2014 and April 2015, with 25–75% interquartile ranges.
| Clinical recognition of infections caused by EDPs (MoH) | 7 | 106 | 100 | 47.5 (36 − 53) | 77 (67 − 86) | 30 (21 − 40) |
| Clinical recognition of infections caused by EDPs (SVCS) | 6 | 97 | 97 | 47 (36 − 59) | 75 (64 − 82) | 25 (13 − 39) |
| Epidemiology (MoH) | 7 | 60 | 59 | 45.5 (36.5−53) | 69 (59 − 78) | 23 (15.5−28.5) |
| Epidemiology (SVCS) | 7 | 53 | 53 | 34.5 (30.5−41.5) | 54.5 (47 − 67) | 19.5 (9 − 29) |
| Basic PCR | 5 | 19 | 17 | 32 (16 − 48) | 80 (80 − 88) | 40 (20 − 60) |
| Advanced PCR | 4 | 10 | 8 | 40 (32 − 50) | 73.5 (70 − 83) | 28.5 (24−45.5) |
| Basic serology | 4 | 20 | 20 | 27 (18−28.5) | 87 (80 − 93) | 66 (47 − 71) |
| Advanced serology | 2 | 4 | 4 | 44.5 (41.5−48) | 76 (61−88.5) | 30.5 (13 − 46) |
| Basic bacteriology | 2 | 10 | 10 | 50 (36 − 59) | 70 (61−77.5) | 17.5 (10 − 25) |
| Advanced bacteriology | 2 | 7 | 7 | 55 (42.5−57.5) | 85 (82.5−87.5) | 30 (27.5−42.5) |
Tests were administered each week of a 2-week course; scores represent an average of the two pre-training test and the two post-training test scores.
Figure 7Quartile values of median pre- and post-training test scores for Annual BS&S Refresher training events for 2013 and 2014. Note that one individual in 2013 scored a 0 on the post-training test which was later determined to be due to an inability to read Azerbaijani. Following this result, a Russian translation was also made available, or the tests were read aloud to individuals who could not read Azerbaijani. Excluding this individual, the lowest score on a post-training test was 30%.