Let the kids play: gamification as a CPR training methodology in secondary school students. A quasi-experimental manikin simulation study

OBJECTIVE

Gamification is a non-evaluation and competition-based training methodology with high emotional involvement. The goal of this study was to evaluate gamification methodology as compared with other existing methodologies when teaching cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to secondary school students.

METHODS

489 secondary school students from two high schools in Spain participated in this randomised-block quasi-experimental study in February 2018. The students were classified into different groups. Each group received CPR training with a different methodology: GAM (gamification-based training as a compulsory but non-tested academic activity to learn by playing in teams, with instructor and visual feedback); EVA (training based on subsequent evaluation as a motivational incentive, with instructor and visual feedback); VFC (visual feedback complementary, training based on a non-compulsory and non-tested academic activity, with instructor and visual feedback); TC (traditional complementary, training based on a non-compulsory and non-tested academic activity, with instructor feedback). After a week, each student performed a 2 min hands-only CPR test and quality of CPR was assessed. Visual feedback in training and CPR variables in test were provided by the QCPR Instructor App using a Little Anne manikin, both from Laerdal (Norway).

RESULTS

GAM (89.56%; 95% CI 86.71 to 92.42) methodology resulted in significantly higher scores for CPR quality than VFC and TC (81.96%; 95% CI 78.04% to 85.88% and 64.11%; 95% CI 58.23 to 69.99). GAM (61.77%; 95% CI 56.09 to 67.45) methodology also resulted in significantly higher scores for correct rate than VFC and TC (48.41%; 95% CI 41.15% to 55.67% and 17.28%; 95% CI 10.94 to 23.62). 93.4% of GAM methodology participants obtained >50 mm of compression mean depth which was a significantly higher proportion than among students in VFC and TC (78.0% and 71.9%). No differences between GAM and EVA were found. A confidence level of 95% has been assigned to all values.

CONCLUSIONS

GAM methodology resulted in higher CPR quality than non-tested methods of academic training with instructor feedback or visual feedback. Gamification should be considered as an alternative teaching method for Basic Life Support (BLS) in younger individuals.

The effectiveness of modified basic life support module on knowledge, attitude, and performance of cardiopulmonary resuscitation among university students

Introduction:

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a primary method used in the treatment of sudden cardiac arrest. It is a crucial skill that a healthcare provider and a lay rescuer should acquire to improve the survival and the neurological outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Several modules were used to teach cardiopulmonary resuscitation for the healthcare provider and lay rescuer, but no module been developed that could be utilised in both population. Thus, this study aims to investigate the effectiveness of modified cardiopulmonary resuscitation training to knowledge (K), attitude (A), and performance (P) between medical and non-medical university students.

Methods:

This research was a single experimental study involving a total number of 125 students: 58 for a medical group and 67 for a non-medical group. A modified basic life support module, based on American Heart Association guideline 2015 was delivered to both groups under the same study setting. Pre and post KA scores were assessed using Res-Q questionnaire. The performance was evaluated by resuscitation feedback machine. The KA scores were analysed using repeated measure analysis of variance, and performance was examined using Pearson chi-square.

Results:

The study showed 64.8% of the participants were able to perform high-quality chest compression. Despite significant differences of sociodemographic background, there was no significant difference on effective chest compression between two groups (p = 0.200). There were also significant improvements in KA scores in both groups after intervention (p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

The knowledge of cardiopulmonary resuscitation can be delivered to everyone as aspired by our stakeholder to have one qualified cardiopulmonary resuscitation provider in a family. This modified basic life support module is reliably applicable to both healthcare and lay rescuer cardiopulmonary resuscitation training. All rescuers will perform in a similar manner, and this will tremendously reduce the discrepancy in the cardiopulmonary resuscitation qualities. Ultimately, this will improve an out-of-hospital return of spontaneous circulation rate.