Improving capacity for advanced training in obstetric surgery: Evaluation of a blended learning approach

Introduction Significant differences in outcomes for mothers and babies following obstetric surgical interventions between low- and middle-income countries and high-income settings have demonstrated a need for improvements in quality of care and training of obstetric surgical and anaesthetic providers. To address this a five-day face-to-face training intervention was developed. When the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted its roll-out, the course was redesigned for delivery by blended learning. Methods This 3-part blended-learning course (part-1: 15 hours self-directed online learning, part-2: 13 hours facilitated virtual workshops and part-3: 10 hours face-to-face delivery), was conducted in Kenya. We assessed the completion rate of part-1 (21 assignments), participation rate in parts 2 and 3, participant satisfaction, change in knowledge and skills and compared the cost of the blended delivery compared to the 5-day face-to-face delivery, in GB Pounds. Results 65 doctors took part in part 1, 53 completing at least 90% of the assignments. 60 doctors participated in part 2, and 53 participated in part 3. Participants completing an evaluation reported (n=53) attending the training was a good use of their time (each of parts-1 and 3: 98%, part-2: 94%) and would recommend this to other colleagues (part-1 and 3: 98%, part-2: 90%). Mean (SD) knowledge score improved from 64% (7%) to 80% (8%) and practical skills from 44% (14%) to 87% (7%). The blended course achieved a cost-saving of £207 per participant compared to the 5-day face-to-face delivery approach. Conclusion We have demonstrated that a blended learning approach to clinical training in a low resource setting is feasible, acceptable and more cost effective. More studies are required to investigate the effectiveness of this approach on health outcomes. ### Competing Interest Statement Charles Ameh is an editor of this journal None of the other authors have any competing interests ### Funding Statement UK Government Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office funded this work ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: This study reports only monitoring and evaluation and is therefore exempt for ethical requirements. Delivery and evaluation of the AOAC using both the traditional and the blended learning approaches was approved by the Kenya Ministry of Health and all participating counties. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes All data relevant to the study are included in the article.