| Literature DB >> 22716920 |
Nalini Singhal1, Jocelyn Lockyer, Herta Fidler, Khalid Aziz, Douglas McMillan, Xiangming Qiu, Xiaolu Ma, Lizhong Du, Shoo K Lee.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Acute Care of at-Risk Newborns (ACoRN) program was developed in Canada for trained health care providers for the identification and management of newborns who are at-risk and/or become unwell in the first few hours or days after birth. The ACoRN process follows an 8-step framework that enables the evaluation and management of babies irrespective of the experience or expertise of the caregiving individual or team. This study assesses the applicability of the program to Chinese pediatric practitioners.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22716920 PMCID: PMC3437201 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-12-44
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Participant perceptions of utility and course function
| The focus group discussions | 179 | 4.31 | 0.65 |
| The respiratory and cardiovascular sections | 204 | 4.47 | 0.64 |
| The neurology, surgery and fluids sections | 204 | 4.42 | 0.63 |
| The case discussions | 200 | 4.43 | 0.68 |
| The “admission” station with monitoring | 198 | 4.40 | 0.68 |
| The temperature and infection sections | 202 | 4.40 | 0.63 |
| The skills stations | 199 | 4.35 | 0.66 |
| The “how to teach” pointers | 188 | 4.27 | 0.71 |
| | | | |
| The content is presented in a logical order | 205 | 4.47 | 0.63 |
| The primary survey and sequences are good learning tools | 205 | 4.58 | 0.62 |
| The primary survey and sequences are clinically useful | 205 | 4.54 | 0.65 |
| ACoRN promotes communication and a team approach | 205 | 4.39 | 0.67 |
| The workshop activities help achieve learning goals, generate interest, and promote critical thinking | 203 | 4.52 | 0.60 |
| The laminated primary survey and sequences are useful learning tools | 204 | 4.50 | 0.66 |
| I will apply what I learned in my clinical practice | 204 | 4.49 | 0.64 |
| I will be comfortable teaching this content in my institution | 204 | 4.23 | 0.75 |
Self-assessment of confidence
| | | |
| Baby who is sick | 3.69 ± 0.91 | 4.36 ± 0.61* |
| Baby with respiratory distress | 3.83 ± 0.89 | 4.43 ± 0.63* |
| Baby with central cyanosis | 3.51 ± 0.99 | 4.42 ± 0.70* |
| Baby with signs of shock | 3.21 ± 0.94 | 4.05 ± 0.66* |
| Baby with jitteriness/seizures | 3.56 ± 0.97 | 4.38 ± 0.63* |
| Baby needs blood glucose check | 3.45 ± 1.10 | 4.43 ± 0.65* |
| Baby has early signs of infection | 3.04 ± 0.88 | 4.00 ± 0.74* |
| | | |
| Tests a sick baby needs | 3.36 ± 0.90 | 4.13 ± 0.71* |
| Treatments a sick baby needs | 3.07 ± 0.96 | 3.95 ± 0.73* |
| If baby needs ventilation or CPAP | 3.27 ± 1.01 | 4.21 ± 0.68* |
| Treatment for low glucose | 3.34 ± 1.12 | 4.37 ± 0.77* |
| | | |
| Start treatment with IV fluids | 3.54 ± 1.03 | 4.18 ± 0.81* |
| Keep a stable temperature | 3.63 ± 0.98 | 4.40 ± 0.65* |
| Speak with parents about baby | 3.50 ± 0.87 | 4.15 ± 0.72* |
| Total | 47.56 ± 10.37 | 59.21 ± 7.65* |
* Compare with pre-test score, p < 0.01.
Scenarios for evaluation of knowledge
| Scenario A; A term infant with respiratory distress | 8.28 ± 1.58 | 9.04 ± 1.14* | 0.55 |
| Scenario B: A 2-hour old 32 week preterm infant with respiratory distress | 7.90 ± 1.83 | 9.18 ± 1.05* | 0.87 |
| Scenario C: A 4-day old baby with jaundice, fever and a seizure | 8.39 ± 1.53 | 9.56 ± 0.81* | 0.96 |
| Scenario D: A well term infant after intubation and suctioning for meconium-stained amniotic fluid | 6.95 ± 2.10 | 7.10 ± 1.93 | Not significant |
| Total (maximum 40) | 31.37 ± 5.12 | 34.74 ± 3.53* | 0.77 |
* Compare with pre-test score, p < 0.01.
Correlations of pre and post measures
| 1 Pre confidence | 1 | .586** | .303** | .280** | .383** | .232** | .395** | .155* | NS | .162* | NS | .148* | NS | NS |
| 2 Post confidence | | 1 | .230** | .323** | .235** | .234** | .205** | .207** | NS | .140* | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 3 Pre Scenario A | | | 1 | .330** | .471** | .155* | .319** | NS | NS | .142* | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 4 Post Scenario A | | | | 1 | .193** | .335** | .172* | .236** | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 5 Pre Scenario B | | | | | 1 | .342** | .645** | .221** | .173* | NS | NS | .145* | NS | NS |
| 6 Post Scenario B | | | | | | 1 | .227** | .507** | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 7 Pre Scenario C | | | | | | | 1 | NS | .220** | NS | NS | .154* | NS | NS |
| 8 Post Scenario C | | | | | | | | 1 | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 9 Pre Scenario D | | | | | | | | | 1 | .497** | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 10 Post Scenario D | | | | | | | | | | 1 | NS | NS | NS | NS |
| 11 Total Usefulness | | | | | | | | | | | 1 | .672** | .527** | .628** |
| 12 Total Content | | | | | | | | | | | | 1 | .589** | .795** |
| 13 Teaching | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1 | .643** |
| 14 Applying Learning | 1 |
NS = Not significant; **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Linear regression analysis
| Pre Knowledge | .302 | .045 | .440** |
| Pre Comfort | .048 | .022 | .138* |
| R2 | | .261 | |
| F for change in R2 | 36.514** |
Summary of Backward Regression Analysis Predicting Post Knowledge Scores
*p < .05, **p < .00.