Facilitators and barriers for the implementation of resuscitation training programmes for schoolchildren: A systematic review

Kids save lives: Who should train schoolchildren in resuscitation? A systematic review

Aim

CPR training for schoolchildren to increase bystander CPR-rates is widely applied. HCPs are regarded as the instructor gold standard, but using non-HCP instructors (e.g., peer-tutors, schoolteachers, medical students) challenges that. This systematic review assesses whether cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training for children led by peer-tutors, schoolteachers, or medical students results in different learning outcomes to training by health-care professionals (HCPs).

Methods

We searched studies that compared CPR training for schoolchildren (population) delivered by peer-tutors, schoolteachers, or medical students (intervention), with training led by HCPs (comparison), assessing student knowledge, skills, willingness and/or confidence to perform CPR (outcome). We included randomized and non-randomized controlled trials (study design). Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, Cinahl, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, and Eric were searched from inception until December 23rd, 2023 (timeframe). Two independent reviewers performed title, abstract, full text screening, bias assessment, and grading of certainty of evidence. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, and registered the review with PROSPERO.

Results

Of 9'092 studies identified, 14 were included. Comparison of intervention groups to HCP-led training showed similar overall results (knowledge, skills, self-confidence). Superior results for HCP training were only reported for 'ventilation volume', while schoolteachers and medical students achieved superior knowledge transfer. A meta-analysis was possible for 'compression depth' between peer-tutors and HCPs showing no significant differences. Certainty of evidence was 'low' to 'very low'.

Conclusion

This systematic review of CPR training for school children revealed that peer-tutors, schoolteachers and medical students achieve similar educational outcomes compared to those of HCPs. Non-HCPs training schoolchildren is an appropriate cost-efficient alternative and easy to implement in school curricula.

Comparison of blended e-learning and face-to-face-only education for resuscitation training in German schools - A cluster randomized-controlled prospective study

Background & Objectives

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is the key for surviving cardiac arrest. Recent recommendations propose that CPR can - and should -be taught to schoolchildren. This e-learning-based study analyzes whether face-to-face CPR training can be partly substituted with e-learning by measuring CPR knowledge and self-efficacy in trainees.

Methods

In this cluster randomized-controlled prospective, students attending grades 5 to 7 of a German secondary school volunteered to participate and were randomly assigned to one of two groups with different methods for CPR training each: a traditional instructor-led group (control) where students received face-to-face teaching by a BLS instructor (45 min), and an e-learning group (intervention) where schoolchildren were able to accomplish their theoretical CPR training using an e-learning module (15 min). CPR knowledge and self-efficacy were measured and compared before (t0) and after (t1) the training using questionnaires. Face-to-face CPR training (45 min) on manikins proceeded in both groups hereafter. The formal hypothesis was that e-learning would result in better CPR knowledge.

Results

Overall, 375 students participated; 33 of which had to be excluded. 342 participants were included in statistical analysis (instructor-led group n = 109; e-learning group n = 233). The study was terminated early due to the Covid19 pandemic, and did not reach the required number of participants. Lacking statistical power, an analysis of the existing datasets failed to show superiority of e-learning vs. conventional training for CPR knowledge (p = 0.306). Both groups improved CPR knowledge (p < 0.001) and self-efficacy (p < 0.001) after CPR training and showed an equal, high level of satisfaction with their perceived training method (face-to-face: 4.1[4.0-4.2] vs. e-learning: 4.0[3.9-4.1]; p = 0.153; maximum 5 points).

Conclusions

This study failed to demonstrate superiority for e-learning but was terminated early and hence underpowered. Further research is necessary to prove the efficiency of e-learning tools for CPR.

Facilitators and Barriers Perceived by German Teachers Considering Basic Life Support Education in School-A Qualitative Study

This qualitative study aims to analyse the personal qualification, attitudes and the pedagogical concepts of German teachers as experts in their profession regarding basic life support (BLS) education in secondary schools. Thirteen (n = 13) secondary school teachers participated in semi-structured expert interviews and were interviewed for at least 20 to 60 min regarding BLS student education. Interviews were semi-structured with guiding questions addressing (1) personal experience, (2) teacher qualification for BLS and (3) implementation factors (e.g., personal, material and organisational). Audio-recorded interviews were analysed by content analysis, generating a coding system. School teachers provided a heterogeneous view on implementation-related processes in BLS education. Many teachers were educated in first aid, acknowledge its importance, but had no experience in teaching BLS. They want to assure being competent for teaching BLS and need tailored trainings, materials, pedagogical information and the incorporation into the curriculum. Also, the management of time constraints, unwilling colleagues, or young students being overwhelmed were commonly mentioned considerations. Concluding, teachers reported to be willing to teach BLS but a stepwise implementation framework incorporating practice-oriented qualification and educational goals is missing.

Methods to teach schoolchildren how to perform and retain cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skills: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Worldwide, bystander CPR rates are low; one effective way to increase these rates is to train schoolchildren; however, the most effective way to train them is currently unknown.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, evaluated whether CPR training for schoolchildren, using innovative teaching modalities (nonpractical, self, or peer-training) versus standard instructor-led training, resulted in higher quality CPR, self-confidence and short-term (≤3 months post-training) or long-term (>3 months post-training) retention of CPR skills.

Results

From 9793 citations, 96 studies published between 1975 and 2022 (44 RCTs and 52 before/after studies) were included. There were 43,754 students, average age of 11.5 ± 0.9 (range 5.9-17.6) and 49.2% male. Only 13 RCTs compared practical vs. nonpractical training (n = 5), self- vs. instructor-led training (n = 7) or peer- vs. instructor-led training (n = 5). The observed statistically significant differences in mean depth and rate of compressions between children with hands-on practical training and those without were not clinically relevant. Regardless of training modality, compression depth was consistently suboptimal. No differences were observed in CPR skills immediately or ≤ 3 months post-training, between children who were self- or peer-trained vs. instructor-led. Due to lack of data, we were unable to evaluate the impact of these novel training modalities on student self-confidence.

Conclusion

Although innovative training modalities are equally effective to instructor-led training when teaching schoolchildren CPR, compression depth was frequently suboptimal. Recommendations on standardized training and evaluation methods are necessary to understand the best ways to train children.

Addressing the Helper's and Victim's Gender Is Crucial in Schoolchildren Resuscitation Training-A Prospective, Educative Interventional Trial

Background: A victim’s gender is a known factor that influences the willingness of adult bystanders to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) if an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) occurs. This study aims to identify whether gender characteristics of OHCA victims are also relevant to schoolchildren, who are the key target group of CPR trainings worldwide. Methods: A prospective, educative intervention study was performed in schoolchildren (5th−7th grade). Schoolchildren’s willingness to perform CPR was assessed by means of questionnaires before (t0) and after (t1) standardized CPR training. Participants were asked how determined they were to perform CPR in male and female OHCA victims on a 5-point Likert scale (not being determined to being very determined). A data analysis was performed according to the gender characteristics of schoolchildren. Results: Overall, 342 schoolchildren aged 10−15 years were included, and 166 male (MG) and 176 female (FG) schoolchildren served as a comparison group. Before (t0) and after (t1) the intervention, females showed a significantly higher general willingness to perform CPR than males (t0: 97.1% vs. 89.0%; p < 0.003 and t1: 95.7% vs. 98.9%; p = 0.038). The general willingness to perform CPR after training had a stronger increase in males (8.0% vs. 2.3%; p = 0.017). In the case that the OHCA victim was female, male schoolchildren were less willing to perform CPR than females at baseline (MG: n = 101;60.8% vs. FG: n = 147;84.5%; p < 0.001) and after training (MG: n = 97;58.4% vs. FG: n = 138;79.3%; p < 0.001). At t1, CPR willingness for female victims was improved in males (MG: n = 36;21.7% vs. FG: n = 19;10.9%; p = 0.006). Conclusions: The gender characteristics of OHCA victims, as well as schoolchildren themselves, have a relevant impact on the willingness to perform CPR. Training concepts should effectively motivate male schoolchildren to reduce preexisting inhibitions, especially towards female OHCA patients. Trial registration: This study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (Registration number: DRKS00017707) on 2 August 2019.