The effectiveness of a disaster training programme for healthcare workers in Greece.

Statistical analysis: normality checks, 1-way ANOVA, t-tests,..

Qualitative approach – survey, quasi-experimental design

A structured questionnaire was used. It included an introductorystatement, eight demographic questions and 19 multiple-choiceknowledge questions, which had only one correct answer.

Source population: 224 healthcare workers in a public hospital [mix of senior and junior staff]. Final study population: 56 participants -- Power and sample size calculations showed that 46 elements were required in order to have a 90% chance of detecting as significant (at the 5% level) an absolute increase in score equal to 7%.The comparison group that was used in order to compare their results with the intervention group results included 35 individuals who did not take part in the training and were willing to complete the questionnaire.

Study objectives:create and implement a disaster training courseimprove basic knowledge of the hospital disaster plan among the different professionals of healthcare personnel (physicians, nurses, and administrative and paramedical staff)measure the efficacy of the training and assess personal disaster preparedness after its implementationevaluate the usefulness of the interventiontest the hypothesis that a brief educational intervention would improve hospital staff knowledge about the hospital disaster plan and procedures.

The opportunistic selection process that was used in order to include individualsin the comparison group was open to selection bias.Relatively small number of participants in the training resulted in reduced power in the subgroup analysis.External validity of the study was poor because the training course that was developed cannot be used by hospitals worldwide without being adjusted first.

The disaster training course had a great benefit for the participants. This study suggests that a brief educational intervention is beneficial, but more must be done.The intervention resulted in a significant improvement in knowledge. The mean score was significantly higher immediately after the intervention programme.Participants in the control group achieved a score of 40 (SE: 2.4), which was significantly lower than the scores of the intervention group after the course (P < 0.001).

The hospital’s institutional review board provided its approval for the study.Nobody who was approached refused to give consent or to participate in the study.

Survey purpose was to assess basic knowledge of the hospital disaster plan and its procedures. All the three questionnaires (pre-test, immediate post-test, follow-up test) included the same questions with a different order each time.