Stefanie Beck1, Malte Issleib2, Anne Daubmann3, Christian Zöllner2. 1. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martini-Str. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany. Electronic address: st.beck@uke.de. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martini-Str. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany. 3. Department of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martini-Str. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rate of bystanders who provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is low in Germany. To increase the bystander CPR rates of lay-rescuers in Germany, the national "einlebenretten" ("save one life") campaign was initiated, and the introduction of CPR-training for all seventh-grade students was recommended. To meet the requirement of offering effective and low-cost mass-training to lay-rescuers, we adopted peer education for the basic life support (BLS) training of the students. METHODS: We used an experimental, prospective, randomized, controlled, and open-label noninferiority trial to test whether the hands-on BLS training of the students that was provided by peers was inferior to the training by professional instructors using a predefined noninferiority margin of 5%. The students from eight different schools were trained in one 45 min practice session to perform BLS based on the educational framework provided by "einlebenretten". The students were randomly assigned to be trained either by peer-instructors (students in the same school who had been instructed in advance) or by professional instructors. In a structured practical assessment, the eight essential skills of BLS were tested and the examination was scored as either pass or fail. RESULTS: The study included 1087 students 14-18 years of age. The performance in the assessment was similar between the two groups: 40.3% (n=471) of the students in the peer-led group and 41.0% (n=466) in the professional-led group passed the examination. CONCLUSION: The students who were trained by peer-instructors showed comparable skills in BLS to the students who were trained by professional instructors. The sample size was too small to demonstrate the noninferiority of the peer-led training.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The rate of bystanders who provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is low in Germany. To increase the bystander CPR rates of lay-rescuers in Germany, the national "einlebenretten" ("save one life") campaign was initiated, and the introduction of CPR-training for all seventh-grade students was recommended. To meet the requirement of offering effective and low-cost mass-training to lay-rescuers, we adopted peer education for the basic life support (BLS) training of the students. METHODS: We used an experimental, prospective, randomized, controlled, and open-label noninferiority trial to test whether the hands-on BLS training of the students that was provided by peers was inferior to the training by professional instructors using a predefined noninferiority margin of 5%. The students from eight different schools were trained in one 45 min practice session to perform BLS based on the educational framework provided by "einlebenretten". The students were randomly assigned to be trained either by peer-instructors (students in the same school who had been instructed in advance) or by professional instructors. In a structured practical assessment, the eight essential skills of BLS were tested and the examination was scored as either pass or fail. RESULTS: The study included 1087 students 14-18 years of age. The performance in the assessment was similar between the two groups: 40.3% (n=471) of the students in the peer-led group and 41.0% (n=466) in the professional-led group passed the examination. CONCLUSION: The students who were trained by peer-instructors showed comparable skills in BLS to the students who were trained by professional instructors. The sample size was too small to demonstrate the noninferiority of the peer-led training.
Authors: Ying-Chih Ko; Ming-Ju Hsieh; Adam Cheng; Kasper G Lauridsen; Taylor L Sawyer; Farhan Bhanji; Robert Greif Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: Syed E Ahmad; Gino A Farina; Alice Fornari; Ruth Ellen Pearlman; Karen Friedman; Doreen M Olvet Journal: J Med Educ Curric Dev Date: 2021-05-31
Authors: Justin D Salciccioli; Dominic C Marshall; Mark Sykes; Alexander D Wood; Stephanie A Joppa; Madhurima Sinha; P Boon Lim Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Christoph Süss-Havemann; Janina Kosan; Thomas Seibold; Nils Martin Dibbern; Anne Daubmann; Jens Christian Kubitz; Stefanie Beck Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-01-13 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: M Binkhorst; J M Th Draaisma; Y Benthem; E M R van de Pol; M Hogeveen; E C T H Tan Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2020-11-13 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Robert Greif; Andrew Lockey; Jan Breckwoldt; Francesc Carmona; Patricia Conaghan; Artem Kuzovlev; Lucas Pflanzl-Knizacek; Ferenc Sari; Salma Shammet; Andrea Scapigliati; Nigel Turner; Joyce Yeung; Koenraad G Monsieurs Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 0.826