Educational Interventions to Improve Preparedness for Mass Casualty Incidents and Armed Conflict: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Lars Veldhuis, Joris Verbeek, Mehmet Kaya, Jessica Lantinga, Caspar Muller, Michiel Verhofstad
{"title":"Educational Interventions to Improve Preparedness for Mass Casualty Incidents and Armed Conflict: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Lars Veldhuis, Joris Verbeek, Mehmet Kaya, Jessica Lantinga, Caspar Muller, Michiel Verhofstad","doi":"10.1093/milmed/usag492","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mass casualty incidents (MCIs), terrorist attacks, and armed conflicts place significant demands on healthcare systems and require rapid triage, effective teamwork, and life-saving interventions under resource-limited conditions. Training and educational programs are widely implemented to improve disaster preparedness among healthcare providers, but the measurable effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions on measurable preparedness outcomes among healthcare professionals.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Medline (Ovid), Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar were used. Studies evaluating pre- and post-intervention outcomes following educational or training interventions for MCIs or war-related scenarios were included. Outcomes of interest included knowledge, clinical skills performance, and triage accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1,836 records were identified, of which 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies used single-group pre-post designs (n = 32, 76%), while 6 were randomized controlled trials (14%) and 4 were controlled non-randomized studies (10%). Educational interventions included course-based training, simulation-based training, e-learning, and blended learning approaches. The majority of studies reported significant improvements in knowledge (14/15 studies), hands-on clinical skills (13/14 studies), and triage performance (6/7 studies) following training. Only 4 studies assessed long-term retention.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Educational interventions improve preparedness for mass casualty incidents and war-related scenarios. Simulation-based and multidisciplinary training appear most effective. However, the certainty of evidence quality remains limited. Preparedness should therefore be viewed as a continuous process requiring repeated training, objective evaluation, and stronger civil-military collaboration.</p>","PeriodicalId":18638,"journal":{"name":"Military Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usag492","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Mass casualty incidents (MCIs), terrorist attacks, and armed conflicts place significant demands on healthcare systems and require rapid triage, effective teamwork, and life-saving interventions under resource-limited conditions. Training and educational programs are widely implemented to improve disaster preparedness among healthcare providers, but the measurable effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions on measurable preparedness outcomes among healthcare professionals.

Materials and methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Medline (Ovid), Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar were used. Studies evaluating pre- and post-intervention outcomes following educational or training interventions for MCIs or war-related scenarios were included. Outcomes of interest included knowledge, clinical skills performance, and triage accuracy.

Results: A total of 1,836 records were identified, of which 42 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies used single-group pre-post designs (n = 32, 76%), while 6 were randomized controlled trials (14%) and 4 were controlled non-randomized studies (10%). Educational interventions included course-based training, simulation-based training, e-learning, and blended learning approaches. The majority of studies reported significant improvements in knowledge (14/15 studies), hands-on clinical skills (13/14 studies), and triage performance (6/7 studies) following training. Only 4 studies assessed long-term retention.

Conclusion: Educational interventions improve preparedness for mass casualty incidents and war-related scenarios. Simulation-based and multidisciplinary training appear most effective. However, the certainty of evidence quality remains limited. Preparedness should therefore be viewed as a continuous process requiring repeated training, objective evaluation, and stronger civil-military collaboration.

提高大规模伤亡事件和武装冲突准备的教育干预:系统回顾。
背景:大规模伤亡事件、恐怖袭击和武装冲突对卫生保健系统提出了重大要求,需要在资源有限的条件下进行快速分类、有效的团队合作和挽救生命的干预措施。培训和教育项目被广泛实施,以提高医疗服务提供者的备灾能力,但这些干预措施的可衡量效果尚不清楚。本系统综述旨在评估教育干预对医疗保健专业人员可测量的准备结果的有效性。材料和方法:按照PRISMA指南进行系统评价。使用Medline (Ovid)、Embase、Web of Science Core Collection、Cochrane CENTRAL和谷歌Scholar。对MCIs或战争相关情景进行教育或培训干预后评估干预前和干预后结果的研究包括在内。感兴趣的结果包括知识、临床技能表现和分诊准确性。结果:共纳入1836篇文献,其中42篇符合纳入标准。大多数研究采用单组前后设计(n = 32, 76%), 6项为随机对照试验(14%),4项为对照非随机研究(10%)。教育干预措施包括基于课程的培训、基于模拟的培训、电子学习和混合学习方法。大多数研究报告了培训后知识(14/15项研究)、临床实践技能(13/14项研究)和分诊表现(6/7项研究)的显著改善。只有4项研究评估了长期保留。结论:教育干预提高了对大规模伤亡事件和战争相关情景的准备。基于模拟和多学科的培训似乎是最有效的。然而,证据质量的确定性仍然有限。因此,准备工作应被视为一个持续的过程,需要反复训练、客观评估和加强军民合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Military Medicine
Military Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
393
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Military Medicine is the official international journal of AMSUS. Articles published in the journal are peer-reviewed scientific papers, case reports, and editorials. The journal also publishes letters to the editor. The objective of the journal is to promote awareness of federal medicine by providing a forum for responsible discussion of common ideas and problems relevant to federal healthcare. Its mission is: To increase healthcare education by providing scientific and other information to its readers; to facilitate communication; and to offer a prestige publication for members’ writings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书