Feng Li1, Fan Jiang, Xing-Ming Jin, Xiao-Ming Shen. 1. Department of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, Shanghai Children's Medical Center Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The object of this study was to assess, in cost-effective measures, 3 different models for pediatric first-aid training among caregivers and teachers. METHODS: Quasi-experimental design was used. A stratified random sampling method was used to obtain 1282 teachers working at nurseries and kindergartens in Shanghai that consists of 18 districts and 1 county. One thousand two hundred eighty-two teachers were allocated randomly to the 3 models of training: 441 to interactive training model (group A), 441 to lecture-based training model (group B), and 400 to video instruction training model (group C). The first-aid knowledge in the 3 models was evaluated before and after the training. RESULTS: There was a statistical significance in the results of postassessment among the 3 training models. In group A, 329 (87.3%) trainees passed the course; in group B, 294 (81.7%) passed; and in group C, 262 (79.4%) passed. The total cost of group A was ¥2361 per edition, the total cost of group B was ¥1955 per edition, and the total cost of group C was ¥1064 per edition (P < 0.001). The cost per passed student was ¥151 in group A, ¥74 in group B, and ¥41 in group C (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although interactive training model may slightly increase the rate of trainees who passed the course, the cost-effectiveness of video instruction training model is clearly superior.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The object of this study was to assess, in cost-effective measures, 3 different models for pediatric first-aid training among caregivers and teachers. METHODS: Quasi-experimental design was used. A stratified random sampling method was used to obtain 1282 teachers working at nurseries and kindergartens in Shanghai that consists of 18 districts and 1 county. One thousand two hundred eighty-two teachers were allocated randomly to the 3 models of training: 441 to interactive training model (group A), 441 to lecture-based training model (group B), and 400 to video instruction training model (group C). The first-aid knowledge in the 3 models was evaluated before and after the training. RESULTS: There was a statistical significance in the results of postassessment among the 3 training models. In group A, 329 (87.3%) trainees passed the course; in group B, 294 (81.7%) passed; and in group C, 262 (79.4%) passed. The total cost of group A was ¥2361 per edition, the total cost of group B was ¥1955 per edition, and the total cost of group C was ¥1064 per edition (P < 0.001). The cost per passed student was ¥151 in group A, ¥74 in group B, and ¥41 in group C (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although interactive training model may slightly increase the rate of trainees who passed the course, the cost-effectiveness of video instruction training model is clearly superior.