Basic life support training: Demonstration versus lecture – A randomised controlled trial

Stepwise approach to skills teaching in resuscitation: A systematic review

Aim

To compare the effectiveness of Peyton's four-step approach for teaching resuscitation skills with alternative approaches.

Methods

For this systematic review, we followed the PICOST format (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, study design, timeframe) using Peyton's four-step approach as the standard. We included all studies analyzing skills training related to resuscitation and First Aid in any educational setting. Eligible were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (non-randomized controlled trials, interrupted time series, controlled before-and-after studies, cohort studies, published conference abstracts, and case series where n ≥ 5). We excluded unpublished results (e.g. trial protocols), commentaries, editorials, reviews. Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from inception until November 10, 2020 (updated November 25, 2022) for publications in all languages as long as there was an English abstract. Titles and abstracts of the papers retrieved were screened, and eligible publications were analysed in full text. From the final set of papers, data were extracted into a spreadsheet, subsequently risk of bias assessment was performed (using RoB2 and ROBINS-I), and the certainty of evidence (using GRADE) for each paper was assessed. Screening of studies, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and assessment of certainty of evidence were all performed by two independent researchers. This review was conducted in adherence with PRISMA standards and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023377398).

Results

Overall, the search identified 2,574 studies from which 17 were included in the final analysis (14 RCTs, and 3 non-RCTs). The studies involved a total of 2,906 participants from various populations (from lay persons to health care professionals) and analysed nine different resuscitation skills being taught (ranging from chest compressions to needle cricotomy). The alternative teaching approaches ranged from two-steps to five-steps with various modifications of single steps. High methodological and clinical heterogeneity precluded a meta-analysis from being conducted. The risk of bias assessment showed considerable variation between the studies ranging from 'low' to 'serious'. Across all studies, certainty of evidence was rated as very low due to imprecision and inconsistency. Overall, 14 out of 17 studies showed no difference in skill acquisition or retention when comparing Peyton's four steps to other stepwise approaches.

Conclusions

Very low certainty evidence suggest that Peyton's four-step approach was not more effective in resuscitation skills training compared to alternative approaches.

Funding

None.

Teaching basic life support for medical students: Assessment of learning and knowledge retention

BACKGROUND

Education mediated by simulation is a widely used method for teaching basic life support (BLS). The American Heart Association recommends protocols based on scientific evidence to reduce sequelae and mortality. We aimed to assess learning and retention of knowledge of BLS in students of the first semester of the medical course using teaching methods of dialogic expository class (group 1), expository and demonstrative class (group 2), and the two previous methodologies associated with simulated practice (group 3), and after 3 months, memory retention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an experimental, prospective, randomized study. Participants were assessed in terms of performance in theoretical and simulated practical tests, satisfaction with training (Likert scale), and knowledge retention.

RESULTS

The practical test results were analyzed by two experienced observers. Students had 20% progression in knowledge and 80% retention of knowledge after 3 months of exposure comparing the theoretical pre- and posttest. The students in group 3 performed better than the others (P = 0.007) in the posttest. With the simulated practice, the knowledge acquired was maintained after 3 months with a mean performance of 90%, but in the test of the infant age group, there was a loss of learning retention by 10%. There was no difference of the results between the two evaluators (P < 0.001). The training was positively assessed by the participants.

CONCLUSION

The use of different methodologies promoted knowledge progression, with emphasis on simulated practice. Learning retention was maintained after 3 months. In order to teach BLS to infants, it may be necessary to improve teaching techniques.

Comparing Learning Outcomes in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and/or Automated External Defibrillator (AED) Training for Laypeople in Face-to-Face, Online, and Mixed Training Methods: An Integrative Literature Review

Cardiovascular diseases and cardiac arrest (CA) are the main causes of death worldwide. This review aims to identify publications on the learning outcomes for the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) and/or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to train laypeople (LP), the method of training used, the year of publication and their recommendations. We employed Miller's assessment pyramid to describe learning outcomes as knowledge, skills, and confidence. The methods of training are face-to-face, online, and mixed. The evidence found in this study will be used to support the development and validation of a simulation-based training program to teach LP to operate AEDs delivered by drones in rural and remote (R&R) locations. This article is an integrative literature review with a quantitative and qualitative research design and is composed of seven steps: research question, inclusion and exclusion criteria, search and selection of studies, the role of a second reviewer of the findings, data analysis, interpretation and discussion of the results, and finally knowledge synthesis. The results of this review demonstrate that there are no significant differences in the learning outcomes of the different training methods. Since these findings suggest good results in all methods, the development of a training program based on face-to-face, online, and mixed, especially for places with few resources such as R&R places, indicates all methods can be used as good practices to develop training programs.

A Needs-Based Analysis of Teaching on Vaccinations and COVID-19 in German Medical Schools

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need for improving public confidence in vaccines. Academic gaps and redundancies on vaccinations must be identified to revise the medical curriculum for up-to-date training of medical students. This cross-sectional survey assessed the status of vaccine-related teaching in general and specific to COVID-19 in medical schools across Germany. A total of 4313 medical students completed a questionnaire comprising items on national learning goals and perceived needs for teaching on vaccinations. Mixed methods were used to analyse data quantitatively for relative frequencies (%) and correlations between teaching items and semesters (Spearman’s rho), and qualitatively (content analysis). Our findings showed that 38.92% of the students were dissatisfied with teaching on vaccine-preventable diseases, but the perceived satisfaction increased in later semesters (r = 0.46, p < 0.001). Moreover, 75.84% and 68.15% of the students were dissatisfied with teaching related to vaccine scepticism and vaccine-related communication strategies, respectively. Furthermore, 63.79% reported dissatisfaction with teaching on COVID-19 disease and 72.93% with teaching on COVID-19 vaccines. A total of 79.12% stated they educated others on COVID-19 and its vaccines and 75.14% felt responsible to do so. A majority of the medical students were dissatisfied with teaching on dealing with vaccine scepticism, communication strategies and COVID-19 vaccines. We recommend practice-oriented vaccine education, especially for teaching communication skills to medical students.

Basic life support skills can be improved among certified basic life support instructors

Background

A correct visual skill demonstration is important when learning cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED). Basic life support (BLS) instructors are expected to master and demonstrate CPR/AED skills correctly. The aim of this study was to evaluate certified BLS instructors’ competencies in demonstrating CPR and the use of an AED.

Methods

Certified BLS instructors demonstrated CPR and the use of an AED on a resuscitation manikin. Skills were evaluated using data collected from the manikin and video recordings and compared to resuscitation guidelines. Further, instructors completed questionnaires on resuscitation guidelines and rating of their own CPR/AED skills.

Results

Overall, we analyzed data from 125 instructors. Of all chest compressions, only 22% were within guideline recommendations regarding depth. Instructors performed chest compressions with excessive depth (mean depth 64 mm (7.3)) and a mean rate of 115 min⁻¹ (10.8). Only 25% of instructors placed the left AED electrode correctly (median distance 7.6 cm (5.0;10.5)), while the right AED electrode usually was placed correctly (median distance 2.9 cm (1.5;4.0), 85% placed correctly). Nearly half of the instructors failed to state correct answers regarding how to diagnose a cardiac arrest and where to place the AED electrodes. Despite their performance, instructors rated their BLS skills as good.

Conclusion

Certified BLS instructors’ have poor CPR/AED skills and several important knowledge gaps on CPR/AED guidelines in contrast to instructors’ self-reported skills. This highlights a need for improving BLS instructor education, including continuous faculty development to ensure optimal learning conditions for BLS course participants.

The impact of bystander relation and medical training on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes

AIM

In this study, we investigate the impact of bystander relation and medical training on survival to hospital discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients receiving bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on non-traumatic OHCA patients receiving bystander CPR and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) attempted resuscitation from 2015 through 2017. Adjusted logistic regression was used to assess the association between related versus unrelated and layperson versus medically trained bystander CPR providers and survival to hospital discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 4464 OHCA were eligible for inclusion, of which 2385 (53.4%) received CPR from a relative, 468 (10.5%) from a work colleague or friend and 1611 (36.1%) from a stranger. Layperson's provided CPR in 3703 (83.0%) OHCA and medically trained professionals in 761 (17.0%). After adjustment for arrest characteristics, there was no difference in survival to hospital discharge between related versus unrelated CPR (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-1.23, p = 0.555). However, bystander CPR by a medically trained provider rather than a layperson, was associated with an increase in the odds of survival by 47% (AOR 1.47, 95% CI: 1.09-2.00, p = 0.012) in the overall population and 73% (AOR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.21-2.49; p = 0.003) in patients with an initial shockable arrest. Adjusting for public access defibrillation significantly attenuated the effect of medically trained bystander CPR in initial shockable arrests (AOR 1.42, 95% CI: 0.97-2.07; p = 0.073).

CONCLUSION

This study supports ongoing efforts to crowdsource a larger number of first responders with medical training to OHCA patients to assist with the provision of CPR and early defibrillation.