Measuring the outcomes of emergency care short courses offered to healthcare professionals in emergency care settings: a scoping review
4 affiliations
- 1Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing Education, 7 York Road, Parktown, 2193, University of the Witwatersrand, Gauteng, South Africa; Corresponding author.
- 2Seed Global Health, St John of God University, Mzuzu, Malawi
- 3Division of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Family, Community and Emergency Care, F51 Old Main Building, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, 7925, South Africa; African Federation for Emergency Medicine, Cape Town, South Africa
- 4College of Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, 5th floor Desmond Clarence Building, Howard College Campus, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4041, South Africa
Abstract
Introduction: This review examines how the outcomes of educational interventions used to improve emergency care are measured and reported. With an increasing demand for improved emergency care at all levels, many such interventions have taken the form of short courses that are not registerable as a formal professional qualification, yet the reporting and evaluation of their outcomes remains varied and unstandardised. The aim of this scoping review was to map and synthesize global literature on the evaluation and outcomes of emergency care short courses for healthcare professionals. Methods: Published and unpublished literature (1996–2025) was searched in Sabinet, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (PubMed), and CINAHL. Search terms included emergency care short courses, outcomes, impact, evaluation, and healthcare professionals between November 2024 and June 2025. Grey literature searches included ProQuest dissertations, EMBASE conference abstracts, and hand-searching. Studies were screened, data extracted, and results summarized in tables and figures. Results: Seventy-five multi-author studies published between 1996 and 2025 were included, predominantly using pre–post or quasi-experimental designs in clinical settings. Courses were typically delivered face-to-face over 1–5 days to a range of healthcare professionals, most commonly nurses and midwives, and spanned seven content domains, with general emergency care being the most frequent. Evaluations were conducted primarily immediately before (n = 50) and after (n = 54) training. Most studies assessed learning outcomes (n = 52) and learner reaction (n = 31), whereas fewer evaluated behaviour change (n = 22) or results-level outcomes (n = 7), with only a small number reporting outcomes across all four Kirkpatrick levels. Conclusion: Despite a growing evidence base, evaluation of emergency care training remains largely confined to lower Kirkpatrick levels, leaving a critical gap in understanding how training translates into sustained clinical practice change and meaningful health system impact.
Related
- Barriers and facilitators to Medical Emergency Team activation among healthcare professionals: protocol for a multicentre cross-sectional survey in four Swiss hospitals
- How Can We Help People With Long‐Term Health Conditions Understand and Engage in Physical Activity Maintenance From Healthcare to Community Settings? Perspectives of Patients, Carers and Professionals
- A Personalized Recovery Intervention to Support Sleep Health in Emergency Healthcare Professionals
- Proximal outcomes of the ‘Making every contact count’ (MECC) approach in healthcare settings: a rapid review
- Unmet educational needs in geriatric care among interdisciplinary professionals working in ambulatory and home care settings: a pan-European survey by the PROGRAMMING COST Action 21122
BibTeX
@article{botes2026measuring,
title = {{Measuring the outcomes of emergency care short courses offered to healthcare professionals in emergency care settings: a scoping review}},
author = {Meghan Botes and Geldine Chironda and Lauren Lai King and Petra Brysiewicz},
journal = {African Journal of Emergency Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1016/j.afjem.2026.101018},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2026.101018},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Measuring the outcomes of emergency care short courses offered to healthcare professionals in emergency care settings: a scoping review
AU - Meghan Botes
AU - Geldine Chironda
AU - Lauren Lai King
AU - Petra Brysiewicz
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/24
JO - African Journal of Emergency Medicine
DO - 10.1016/j.afjem.2026.101018
UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2026.101018
AB - Introduction: This review examines how the outcomes of educational interventions used to improve emergency care are measured and reported. With an increasing demand for improved emergency care at all levels, many such interventions have taken the form of short courses that are not registerable as a formal professional qualification, yet the reporting and evaluation of their outcomes remains varied and unstandardised. The aim of this scoping review was to map and synthesize global literature on the evaluation and outcomes of emergency care short courses for healthcare professionals. Methods: Published and unpublished literature (1996–2025) was searched in Sabinet, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (PubMed), and CINAHL. Search terms included emergency care short courses, outcomes, impact, evaluation, and healthcare professionals between November 2024 and June 2025. Grey literature searches included ProQuest dissertations, EMBASE conference abstracts, and hand-searching. Studies were screened, data extracted, and results summarized in tables and figures. Results: Seventy-five multi-author studies published between 1996 and 2025 were included, predominantly using pre–post or quasi-experimental designs in clinical settings. Courses were typically delivered face-to-face over 1–5 days to a range of healthcare professionals, most commonly nurses and midwives, and spanned seven content domains, with general emergency care being the most frequent. Evaluations were conducted primarily immediately before (n = 50) and after (n = 54) training. Most studies assessed learning outcomes (n = 52) and learner reaction (n = 31), whereas fewer evaluated behaviour change (n = 22) or results-level outcomes (n = 7), with only a small number reporting outcomes across all four Kirkpatrick levels. Conclusion: Despite a growing evidence base, evaluation of emergency care training remains largely confined to lower Kirkpatrick levels, leaving a critical gap in understanding how training translates into sustained clinical practice change and meaningful health system impact.
SN - 2211-419X
SN - 2211-4203
ER -