Helene Bylow1, Thomas Karlsson2, Andreas Claesson3, Margret Lepp4, Jonny Lindqvist5, Johan Herlitz6. 1. Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. Electronic address: helene.bylow@gu.se. 2. Health Metrics Unit, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 3. Department of Medicine, Centre for Resuscitation Science, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden; Østfold University College, Halden, Norway; School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia. 5. Centre of Registers Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden. 6. Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; Centre of Registers Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden; Prehospen-Centre of Prehospital Research, Faculty of Caring Science, Work Life and Social Welfare, University of Borås, Sweden.
Abstract
AIM: To compare the effectiveness of two basic life support (BLS) training interventions. METHODS: This experimental trial enrolled 1301 lay people in BLS training. The participants were cluster randomised to either self-learning training or to traditional instructor-led training. Both groups used the Mini-Anne Kit (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway) and standardised film instructions. After training, the participants practical skills were measured on a Resusci Anne manikin and an AED trainer with the PC SkillReporting system (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway). The primary outcome was the total score from the modified Cardiff Test of basic life support with automated external defibrillation (19-70 points), six months after training. The secondary outcomes were total score directly after training and quality of individual variables, self-assessed knowledge, confidence and willingness to act, directly and six months after training. RESULTS: For primary outcome six months after training there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.44) between the total score for the self-learning group (n = 670; median 59, IQR 55-62) compared with the instructor-led group (n = 561; median 59, IQR 55-63). The instructor-led training resulted in a statistically significant higher total score (median 61 versus 59, p < 0.0001), self-assessed knowledge and willingness to act, directly after training (secondary outcomes) compared with the self-learning training. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in practical skills or willingness to act when comparing self-learning training with instructor-led training six months after training in BLS. However, directly after the intervention, practical skills were better when the training was led by an instructor.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To compare the effectiveness of two basic life support (BLS) training interventions. METHODS: This experimental trial enrolled 1301 lay people in BLS training. The participants were cluster randomised to either self-learning training or to traditional instructor-led training. Both groups used the Mini-Anne Kit (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway) and standardised film instructions. After training, the participants practical skills were measured on a Resusci Anne manikin and an AED trainer with the PC SkillReporting system (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway). The primary outcome was the total score from the modified Cardiff Test of basic life support with automated external defibrillation (19-70 points), six months after training. The secondary outcomes were total score directly after training and quality of individual variables, self-assessed knowledge, confidence and willingness to act, directly and six months after training. RESULTS: For primary outcome six months after training there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.44) between the total score for the self-learning group (n = 670; median 59, IQR 55-62) compared with the instructor-led group (n = 561; median 59, IQR 55-63). The instructor-led training resulted in a statistically significant higher total score (median 61 versus 59, p < 0.0001), self-assessed knowledge and willingness to act, directly after training (secondary outcomes) compared with the self-learning training. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in practical skills or willingness to act when comparing self-learning training with instructor-led training six months after training in BLS. However, directly after the intervention, practical skills were better when the training was led by an instructor.
Authors: Joris Nas; Jos Thannhauser; Lara S F Konijnenberg; Robert-Jan M van Geuns; Niels van Royen; Judith L Bonnes; Marc A Brouwer Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-05-02
Authors: Helene Bylow; Thomas Karlsson; Margret Lepp; Andreas Claesson; Jonny Lindqvist; Leif Svensson; Johan Herlitz Journal: Med Sci Educ Date: 2020-11-18
Authors: Travis W Murphy; Scott A Cohen; K Leslie Avery; Meenakshi P Balakrishnan; Ramani Balu; Muhammad Abdul Baker Chowdhury; David B Crabb; Karl W Huesgen; Charles W Hwang; Carolina B Maciel; Sarah S Gul; Francis Han; Torben K Becker Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2020-11-04
Authors: Joris Nas; Jos Thannhauser; Priya Vart; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Niels van Royen; Judith L Bonnes; Marc A Brouwer Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 2.692