Jordi Castillo1, Carmen Gomar2, Encarnación Rodriguez3, Marta Trapero4, Alberto Gallart5. 1. Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC), C/ JosepTrueta s/n. 08195 St. Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain; Hospital de Bellvitge, C/ JosepTrueta s/n. 08195 St. Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: jcastillo@uic.es. 2. Universitat de Barcelona, Spain; Department Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: cgomar@clinic.ub.es. 3. UIC and Health Sciences, C/ JosepTrueta s/n. 08195 St. Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: erodriguez@uic.es. 4. Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC), Research Institute for Evaluation and Public Policies (IRAPP) at UIC, C/ Immaculada 22. 08017, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: mtrapero@uic.es. 5. UIC and Health Sciences, C/ JosepTrueta s/n. 08195 St. Cugat del Vallès, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: agallart@uic.es.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of online teaching methodology for basic life support (BLS) courses is progressively increasing. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to verify whether the blended-learning methodology (virtual course with a short face-to-face complement) was more efficient than a course that followed the classical or face-to-face methodology in our university. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cost minimization analysis was performed for two BLS and automatic external defibrillation (AED) courses, one of which was conducted face-to-face (Control Group) and the second of which was conducted via blended-learning (Experimental Group). The courses had the same duration and content according to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) recommendations. In the face-to-face course, direct costs were considered those generated by the faculty and derived from the academic activity. Other costs were those generated by the use of classrooms and the amortization of manikins and AED training. The perspective of the analysis was that of the provider, the academic, and a time horizon of six months. The costs are expressed in € 2017. RESULTS: The savings of a course in BLS-AED based on the blended-learning methodology calculated for a total of 160 university nursing and medical students were € 2328.8 for the first year of its implementation and € 9048.8 for its second edition compared with the same course using a face-to-face methodology. CONCLUSIONS: The blended-learning methodology supposes a cost savings for BLS-AED courses, mainly due to the reduction of expenses of the teaching staff. The blended-learning methodology seems to be more efficient than the face-to-face methodology.
BACKGROUND: The use of online teaching methodology for basic life support (BLS) courses is progressively increasing. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to verify whether the blended-learning methodology (virtual course with a short face-to-face complement) was more efficient than a course that followed the classical or face-to-face methodology in our university. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cost minimization analysis was performed for two BLS and automatic external defibrillation (AED) courses, one of which was conducted face-to-face (Control Group) and the second of which was conducted via blended-learning (Experimental Group). The courses had the same duration and content according to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) recommendations. In the face-to-face course, direct costs were considered those generated by the faculty and derived from the academic activity. Other costs were those generated by the use of classrooms and the amortization of manikins and AED training. The perspective of the analysis was that of the provider, the academic, and a time horizon of six months. The costs are expressed in € 2017. RESULTS: The savings of a course in BLS-AED based on the blended-learning methodology calculated for a total of 160 university nursing and medical students were € 2328.8 for the first year of its implementation and € 9048.8 for its second edition compared with the same course using a face-to-face methodology. CONCLUSIONS: The blended-learning methodology supposes a cost savings for BLS-AED courses, mainly due to the reduction of expenses of the teaching staff. The blended-learning methodology seems to be more efficient than the face-to-face methodology.
Authors: Kristoffer Sand; Anna Ulstein Guldal; Tor Åge Myklebust; Dag Arne Lihaug Hoff; Per Christian Juvkam; Torstein Hole Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2021-08-19