Teach-Back Training Empowers Women to Protect Against STIs

Credit: Adobe Stock/Syda Productions

Women of reproductive age trained using the teach-back method demonstrated significantly better sexually transmitted infection (STI) protection behaviors than those who received face-to-face training or no training. The teach-back method led to sustained improvements in knowledge and behavior for up to three months.

“The transmission of sexually transmitted diseases can be prevented through health education, which is among the preventive health services,” wrote a team of investigators associated in part with Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences at Adiyaman University in Turkey. “Nurses are the leading health educators. Nurses should learn new education systems and models and use them in their practice.”

The teach-back method is a tool people can use to improve their understanding and retention of educational materials. Trainers initially present the content to trainees, and then trainees repeat the practices back to the trainer at the end of the session. In this study, a healthcare professional asked the patient to explain what they were just told. Any misunderstandings are then clarified, and understanding is rechecked. This method not only helps patients but can also help providers to assess what the patient actually understands.

The randomized controlled study enrolled women of reproductive age who visited the Gynecology and Obstetrics Clinic of a private hospital. They were assigned to the teach-back method, face-to-face training or no training (controls) for protection from STIs. The Behavioral Scale for Protection from Sexually Transmitted Diseases was measured pre-training, 15 days post training and three months after the training.

The training sessions were performed by expert nurses and lasted approximately 45 minutes. Patients were encouraged to ask any questions or to repeat the information to ensure comprehension. Topics included what STIs are, the modes of transmission, symptoms, protection and treatment.

Both intervention groups had similar characteristics regarding age, marital status, education and income, and the median ages between groups raged from 28.16 years to 30.64 years. No statistically significant differences were observed between groups in sexual activity, with 64.3% of women in the teach-back group, 73.8% in the face-to-face group and 69% of controls reporting being sexually active.

Most women in the three groups had knowledge of STIs, with 83.3% in the teach-back cohort, 92.9% in the face-to-face group, and 81% of controls reporting a knowledge of STIs. Investigators believe this is due to the high level of education among participants recruited into the study.

Pre-training, no significant differences were observed in the mean score of the Behavioral Scale for Protection from Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Among women in the teach-back group, scores were 75.57 before training, 82.54 15 days post-training and 81.85 at the three-month follow-up. In the face-to-face training group, scores were 76.92, 80.78 and 80.21, respectively. The control group’s scores were 75.73, 75.61 and 75.54, respectively.

Although any training was more effective than no training, the teach-back method showed a more significant increase in knowledge and preventative behaviors compared with face-to-face training.

The only limitation mentioned by investigators was the lack illiterate women, as only literate adult women were included in the study. This may hinder generalizability.

“These findings suggest that the teach-back method can be a valuable tool for healthcare professionals aiming to enhance patient education and encourage long-term behavioral change,” investigators concluded. “Further studies are recommended to explore the long-term effects of teach-back training and its applicability in other health education contexts.”