TY - JOUR
T1 - Use of online opioid overdose prevention training for first-year medical students
T2 - A comparative analysis of online versus in-person training
AU - Berland, Noah
AU - Lugassy, Daniel
AU - Fox, Aaron
AU - Goldfeld, Keith
AU - Oh, So Young
AU - Tofighi, Babak
AU - Hanley, Kathleen
N1 - Funding Information:
The study was supported by Substance Abuse Research Education and Training Program (NIDA 5R25DA022461-04). Support was provided in the means of a training stipend during the summer of 2014 when the project was being developed, and the funding also provided additional support for future phases of the study in the form of second-year follow-up incentives. The funding organization had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The authors wish to thank Dova Marder, MD, Andrew Hallett, Keith Goldfeld, DrPH, Robert Rosenwald, and Ben Suwing.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, © 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
PY - 2019/4/3
Y1 - 2019/4/3
N2 - Purpose: In response to the opioid epidemic and efforts to expand substance use education in medical school, the authors introduced opioid overdose prevention training (OOPT) with naloxone for all first-year medical students (MS1s) as an adjunct to required basic life support training (BLST). The authors previously demonstrated improved knowledge and preparedness following in-person OOPT with BLST; however, it remains unclear whether online-administered OOPT would produce comparable results. In this study, the authors perform a retrospective comparison of online-administered OOPT with in-person-administered OOPT. Objectives: To compare the educational outcomes: knowledge, preparedness, and attitudes, for online versus in-person OOPT. Methods: In-person OOPT was administered in 2014 and 2015 during BLST, whereas online OOPT was administered in 2016 during BLST pre-work. MS1s completed pre- and post-training tests covering 3 measures: knowledge (11-point scale), attitudes (66-point scale), and preparedness (60-point scale) to respond to an opioid overdose. Online scores from 2016 and in-person scores from 2015 were compared across all 3 measures using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) methods. Results: After controlling for pre-test scores, there were statistical, but no meaningful, differences across all measures for in-person- and online-administered training. The estimated differences were knowledge: −0.05 (0.5%) points (95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.47, 0.36); attitudes: 0.65 (1.0%) points (95% CI: −0.22, 1.51); and preparedness: 2.16 (3.6%) points (95% CI: 1.04, 3.28). Conclusions: The educational outcomes of online-administered OOPT compared with in-person-administered OOPT were not meaningfully different. These results support the use of online-administered OOPT. As our study was retrospective, based on data collected over multiple years, further investigation is needed in a randomized controlled setting, to better understand the educational differences of in-person and online training. Further expanding OOPT to populations beyond medical students would further improve generalizability.
AB - Purpose: In response to the opioid epidemic and efforts to expand substance use education in medical school, the authors introduced opioid overdose prevention training (OOPT) with naloxone for all first-year medical students (MS1s) as an adjunct to required basic life support training (BLST). The authors previously demonstrated improved knowledge and preparedness following in-person OOPT with BLST; however, it remains unclear whether online-administered OOPT would produce comparable results. In this study, the authors perform a retrospective comparison of online-administered OOPT with in-person-administered OOPT. Objectives: To compare the educational outcomes: knowledge, preparedness, and attitudes, for online versus in-person OOPT. Methods: In-person OOPT was administered in 2014 and 2015 during BLST, whereas online OOPT was administered in 2016 during BLST pre-work. MS1s completed pre- and post-training tests covering 3 measures: knowledge (11-point scale), attitudes (66-point scale), and preparedness (60-point scale) to respond to an opioid overdose. Online scores from 2016 and in-person scores from 2015 were compared across all 3 measures using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) methods. Results: After controlling for pre-test scores, there were statistical, but no meaningful, differences across all measures for in-person- and online-administered training. The estimated differences were knowledge: −0.05 (0.5%) points (95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.47, 0.36); attitudes: 0.65 (1.0%) points (95% CI: −0.22, 1.51); and preparedness: 2.16 (3.6%) points (95% CI: 1.04, 3.28). Conclusions: The educational outcomes of online-administered OOPT compared with in-person-administered OOPT were not meaningfully different. These results support the use of online-administered OOPT. As our study was retrospective, based on data collected over multiple years, further investigation is needed in a randomized controlled setting, to better understand the educational differences of in-person and online training. Further expanding OOPT to populations beyond medical students would further improve generalizability.
KW - Medical education
KW - naloxone
KW - opioids
KW - overdose
KW - substance use disorders
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073456175&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073456175&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/08897077.2019.1572048
DO - 10.1080/08897077.2019.1572048
M3 - Article
C2 - 30767715
AN - SCOPUS:85073456175
SN - 0889-7077
VL - 40
SP - 240
EP - 246
JO - Substance Abuse
JF - Substance Abuse
IS - 2
ER -
