P3.266: A Needs Assessment: Optimizing Military Medical Humanitarian Response Training

Background: The Military Medical Humanitarian Assistance Course (MMHAC) is a 2-day training focused on practical knowledge and skills for the provision of care to vulnerable populations during humanitarian disasters. Since 1998, MMHAC has been offered to military medical providers at US military hospitals, deployed units, and even hospital ships at sea. The advent of hybrid MMHAC offerings during the COVID-19 pandemic and recent experiences of deployed physicians highlighted the need to conduct a comprehensive review of MMHAC content and outcomes to inform curricular improvements.

Methods: To inform a needs assessment, Step 2 of Kern’s six-step approach to curriculum development, this study analyzed retrospective MMHAC participant data (test scores, course evaluations) and conducted faculty focus groups. Participants completed a 38-item, knowledge-based pre- and post-test; results were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test. Course evaluations included participant ratings of individual course modules using 13 Likert scale questions (1-5) and 15 free-response questions seeking additional feedback on individual modules and the overall course. Semi-structured faculty focus groups with past site directors and instructors were conducted by two researchers. We performed descriptive statistics for the Likert scale ratings and qualitative content analysis of free responses and focus group transcripts.

Results: Data were analyzed from 742 military medical professionals who completed the course from 2020-2024 and focus groups of 15 instructors/site directors in Jan-Feb 2025. Participants scored significantly higher on post-tests than pre-tests (mean [SD] 85.1 [11.7] vs. 53.1 [13.0], p< 0.001), with 89.5% passing the post-test on the first attempt. Participants rated the course overall an average of 4.73/5 (SD 0.5), while individual modules ranged from mean 4.46-4.74/5. Analysis of free-responses revealed that participants recommended expanding modules containing mission planning and logistics, increasing case discussions, incorporating more personal experiences, and enhancing interactive content (Table 1). Additionally, participants requested inclusion of content on psychological first aid, women's health, and chronic conditions. Preliminary analysis of 7 focus group transcripts revealed similar suggestions as past participants and offered additional insight into the most effective strategies for delivery and audience engagement.

Conclusion: Our needs assessment highlights the overall effectiveness of the MMHAC while illustrating the need for enhancing interactive instructional methods and expanding content to additional vulnerable populations. Next steps include triangulation of the needs assessment data with follow-up student surveys, currently in progress, to ensure final conclusions are aligned and robust. These data will inform revisions to goals and objectives (Kern’s Step 3), updates on course content, and modernization of educational strategies (Kern’s Step 4) to optimize humanitarian assistance training and readiness. Following curriculum revision, we will create an implementation strategy (Kern’s Step 5) which includes faculty development to ensure optimal adoption.