Real World Feedback: How Well Did the Virtual Training Academy Prepare California's COVID-19 Contact Tracing Workforce?

Autor:	Westfall M; Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States., Forster M; Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States., Golston O; Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States., Taylor KD; Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States., White K; Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States., Reid MJA; Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States., Dorian A; Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States., Prelip ML; Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States., Shafir S; Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Frontiers in public health [Front Public Health] 2022 Jun 28; Vol. 10, pp. 857674. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Jun 28 (Print Publication: 2022).
DOI:	10.3389/fpubh.2022.857674
Abstrakt:	To effectively respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, California had to quickly mobilize a substantial number of case investigators (CIs) and contact tracers (CTs). This workforce was comprised primarily of redirected civil servants with diverse educational and professional backgrounds. The purpose of this evaluation was to understand whether the weeklong, remote course developed to train California's CI/CT workforce (i.e., Virtual Training Academy) adequately prepared trainees for deployment. From May 2020 to February 2021, 8,141 individuals completed the training. A survey administered ~3 weeks post-course assessed two measures of overall preparedness: self-perceived interviewing proficiency and self-perceived job preparedness. Bivariate analyses were used to examine differences in preparedness scores by education level, career background, and whether trainees volunteered to join the COVID-19 workforce or were assigned by their employers. There were no significant differences in preparedness by education level. Compared to trainees from non-public health backgrounds, those from public health fields had higher self-perceived interviewing proficiency (25.1 vs. 23.3, p < 0.001) and job preparedness (25.7 vs. 24.0, p < 0.01). Compared to those who were assigned, those who volunteered to join the workforce had lower self-perceived job preparedness (23.8 vs. 24.9, p = 0.02). While there were some statistically significant differences by trainee characteristics, the practical significance was small (<2-point differences on 30-point composite scores), and it was notable that there were no differences by education level. Overall, this evaluation suggests that individuals without bachelor's degrees or health backgrounds can be rapidly trained and deployed to provide critical disease investigation capacity during public health emergencies. Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. (Copyright © 2022 Westfall, Forster, Golston, Taylor, White, Reid, Dorian, Prelip and Shafir.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu