Comparative Effectiveness of Lecture, Focus Group Discussion, and Seminar Methods for Improving Midwifery Students’ Knowledge of Disaster Reproductive Health Kit Preparation: A Three-Group Quasi-Experimental Study in Aceh, Indonesia

Abstract

Background: Indonesia is highly exposed to natural hazards, and Aceh Province has repeatedly experienced earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, and landslides. Reproductive health services are frequently disrupted during crises even as needs increase. The Minimum Initial Service Package requires Disaster Reproductive Health Kits to be ready pre-disaster, and midwives are the frontline personnel responsible for their preparation, yet evidence comparing teaching methods for building this competence remains scarce.
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of lecture, focus group discussion (FGD), and seminar methods on midwifery students' knowledge of disaster reproductive health kit preparation.
Methods: A three-group pretest–posttest quasi-experimental study was conducted among midwifery students at the Meulaboh Midwifery Study Program, Poltekkes Kemenkes Aceh, Indonesia, in 2024. Of 105 eligible students, 45 were allocated at the class level to three parallel, dose- and duration-matched 120-minute interventions (lecture, FGD, or seminar; n = 15 each). Knowledge was measured with a 20-item multiple-choice questionnaire pre- and post-intervention. Within-group change was analyzed with paired t tests; between-group differences with one-way ANOVA, Bonferroni post hoc tests, ANCOVA, and logistic regression, with effect sizes reported throughout.
Results: Knowledge increased significantly in all groups (all P < .001), with the largest gain in FGD (Δ = 33.33; 95% CI, 29.06–37.61; d = 4.32), followed by lecture (Δ = 18.00; d = 2.48) and seminar (Δ = 15.67; d = 1.47); only FGD's posttest mean reached the “good” category (≥ 75). Posttest scores differed significantly among groups (F(2,42) = 24.41; P < .001; η² = 0.538), with FGD exceeding lecture and seminar (both P < .001), while lecture and seminar did not differ (P = 1.000). The FGD advantage persisted after adjustment for baseline score (P < .001) and corresponded to higher odds of achieving “good” knowledge (AOR = 26.00; 95% CI, 2.55–265.12).
Conclusion: With content and duration held constant, FGD produced markedly greater knowledge gains than lecture or seminar. These findings support prioritizing structured small-group discussion in disaster-preparedness curricula in hazard-prone settings, pending confirmation in larger randomized trials