Anton Kurdin1, Andrew Caines2, Darrell Boone3, Andrew Furey4. 1. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Electronic address: ak8262@mun.ca. 2. Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. 3. Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. 4. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Trauma resuscitation protocols have unified the care of trauma patients and significantly improved outcomes. However, the success of the Advanced Trauma Life Support course is difficult to reproduce in developing countries due to set-up costs, limitations of resources, and variations of practice. The objective of this study is to assess the Trauma Evaluation and Management (TEAM) course as a low-cost alternative for trauma resuscitation teaching in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMIC). DESIGN: As part of the Team Broken Earth initiative, TEAM course was provided to the health care professionals in Haiti. At its conclusion, participants were asked to complete a survey evaluating the course. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed to evaluate the perception of the course. SETTING: The course was provided in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 80 health care professionals participated in the course. Response was obtained from 69 participants, which comprised of 32 physicians, 10 Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT), 22 nurses, and 5 medical trainees. RESULTS: The course was well received by physicians, nurses, and EMT with an average score of 90.6%. Question analysis revealed a lower satisfaction of physicians for the course manual and teaching materials, and information related to decisions for transfer of patients. EMT consistently felt that the course was not tailored to their learning and practice needs. Written feedback demonstrated several areas of weaknesses including need for improvements in translations, hands-on practice, and educational materials. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the TEAM course was well received. Analysis demonstrated a need for adjustments specific to LMIC including a focus on prehospital assessment, increased nursing responsibilities, and unavailability of specialist's referrals. Team Broken Earth intends to take these findings into consideration and continue to provide the TEAM course to other LMIC.
OBJECTIVE:Trauma resuscitation protocols have unified the care of traumapatients and significantly improved outcomes. However, the success of the Advanced Trauma Life Support course is difficult to reproduce in developing countries due to set-up costs, limitations of resources, and variations of practice. The objective of this study is to assess the Trauma Evaluation and Management (TEAM) course as a low-cost alternative for trauma resuscitation teaching in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMIC). DESIGN: As part of the Team Broken Earth initiative, TEAM course was provided to the health care professionals in Haiti. At its conclusion, participants were asked to complete a survey evaluating the course. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed to evaluate the perception of the course. SETTING: The course was provided in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 80 health care professionals participated in the course. Response was obtained from 69 participants, which comprised of 32 physicians, 10 Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT), 22 nurses, and 5 medical trainees. RESULTS: The course was well received by physicians, nurses, and EMT with an average score of 90.6%. Question analysis revealed a lower satisfaction of physicians for the course manual and teaching materials, and information related to decisions for transfer of patients. EMT consistently felt that the course was not tailored to their learning and practice needs. Written feedback demonstrated several areas of weaknesses including need for improvements in translations, hands-on practice, and educational materials. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the TEAM course was well received. Analysis demonstrated a need for adjustments specific to LMIC including a focus on prehospital assessment, increased nursing responsibilities, and unavailability of specialist's referrals. Team Broken Earth intends to take these findings into consideration and continue to provide the TEAM course to other LMIC.