Design, implementation, and evaluation of a comprehensive educational program for microbiology laboratory personnel and graduate students in teaching hospitals

Patient care and clinical diagnosis are significantly dependent on laboratory results. Repeated shortages of skills and evolving technologies, however, highlight the need for continuous professional development in graduate students and laboratory personnel. The purpose of this study was to design, implement, and evaluate a comprehensive educational program for the microbiology personnel in the teaching hospitals of Tehran University of Medical Sciences as well as for postgraduate students. This single-group, uncontrolled pre-test/post-test evaluation included a nine-month pre-and-post audit of laboratory quality. Baseline assessments in 14 teaching hospitals identified training needs. Ten focused workshops on a set of priority topics, including quality control, antimicrobial resistance, and specimen processing were formulated. Personnel were required to attend, whereas students were invited to attend. Pre- and post-tests, follow-up laboratory audits, and participant satisfaction surveys were used to assess the program’s effectiveness. In total, 282 personnel and 200 student workshop attendances were analyzed; all participants who began a session completed both the pre- and post-tests. Post-test knowledge scores increased significantly for personnel (4.32 ± 1.66 to 7.52 ± 1.70; p < 0.001; Cohen’s d z = 1.68) and students (3.64 ± 1.08 to 7.35 ± 1.47; p < 0.001; Cohen’s d z = 2.33). At nine months, the mean audit score across 14 centers improved from 15.86 ± 2.99 to 17.93 ± 2.75 out of 20 (mean improvement 2.07, 95% CI 1.16–2.98; paired t (13) = 4.93, p < 0.001; Wilcoxon p = 0.001). Satisfaction was high: 85% rated the program as “very good,” and 15% rated it as “good.” The implementation of an organized program led to substantial improvements in knowledge and laboratory audit scores. Due to the lack of a control group and improvements in other areas apart from the training, one cannot conclude that these improvements can be directly attributed to the effect of the training alone. Control groups, individual attendance data, and validated assessment instruments need to be included in future evaluations.