A training program that uses interactive screen saver images linked to a Web site to prepare hospital-based clinicians to respond to bioterrorist attacks is an effective alternative to other more costly and more time-consuming educational methods, according to a recent study published in the American Journal of Infection Control.

Posted on January 22, 2004 at 3:40 p.m.

BIRMINGHAM, AL — A training program that uses interactive screen saver images linked to a Web site to prepare hospital-based clinicians to respond to bioterrorist attacks is an effective alternative to other more costly and more time-consuming educational methods, according to a recent study published in the American Journal of Infection Control. Dr. Thomas Terndrup, chair of emergency medicine and director of the Center for Emergency Care and Disaster Preparedness at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), led the pilot study to develop and test the new training program.

“Before the terrorist attacks in September 2001 and subsequent anthrax attacks, few hospitals considered it a priority to integrate bioterrorist preparedness into their disaster plans,” Terndrup said. “Afterwards, however, the challenge to educate hospital-based clinicians and infection control practitioners to recognize and respond to a bioterrorist event took precedence.”

The pilot study, funded in part by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, aimed to streamline hospital preparedness efforts through the implementation of a screen saver program as an educational tool for clinicians. “Initiatives to prepare hospital-based practitioners must fit among the demands of patient care, administrative duties and continuing education within specialties,” Terndrup said. “The interactive screen saver program was designed with these considerations in mind.”

The research team also had to take into account the sudden urgency felt by hospitals and clinicians to be prepared in the event of a bioterrorist attack, confusion regarding reputable resources to consult and concerns about funding for bioterrorism preparedness training. “These criteria mandated an authoritative, comprehensive and easily accessible approach to training,” Terndrup said. “The screen saver program met these objectives.”

The program is designed to entice clinicians working at or near a computer or merely passing by a monitor to take a closer look. “Striking images of patients, X-rays and microscopic samples of blood and tissue rotate on the screen,” Terndrup said. “Images and questions about the images serve to pique clinicians’ interest. Once engaged, the program prompts clinicians to access detailed information about the images.”

To evaluate the program, researchers tested medical students before and after they completed rotations in the emergency department at UAB, where the screen saver program was installed on all work-site computers. “Based on pre- and post-rotation scores, students’ general knowledge of bioterrorism increased by more than 20 percent,” Terndrup said. “We also concluded that the screen savers did attract attention and led users to access the Web site.”

Due the timing of the terrorist and bioterrorist events of September 2001, which occurred coincidentally between the pre- and post-test periods of the study, further research of screen savers and their application to continuing medical education is needed. However, in this case, the evidence is clear: screen savers are a cost- and time-affordable means of educating hospital-based clinicians about bioterrorism.