Basic life support training: Demonstration versus lecture – A randomised controlled trial

Basic life support (BLS) and the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) improve survival from cardiac arrest. The gold standard for teaching BLS/AED is yet to be identified. The aim of this study was to compare the learning outcome of an instructor-led demonstration with a formal lecture f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American journal of emergency medicine 2020-04, Vol.38 (4), p.720-726
Hauptverfasser: Hansen, Camilla, Bang, Camilla, Rasmussen, Stinne Eika, Nebsbjerg, Mette Amalie, Lauridsen, Kasper G., Bjørnshave Bomholt, Katrine, Krogh, Kristian, Løfgren, Bo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Basic life support (BLS) and the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) improve survival from cardiac arrest. The gold standard for teaching BLS/AED is yet to be identified. The aim of this study was to compare the learning outcome of an instructor-led demonstration with a formal lecture for introducing BLS/AED skills. We hypothesized that a demonstration was superior to a lecture. First year-medical students were randomised to either a demonstration or a lecture using PowerPoint® Presentation for skill introduction during European Resuscitation Council BLS/AED courses. Participants were skill-tested after training and required to perform all skills correctly to pass the test. Finally, all participants were asked to state their preferred teaching method. Overall, 247 participants were included in the analysis (demonstration group: 124, lecture group: 123). Pass rate was 63% in both groups, p = 1.00. Both groups performed median compression rates within guidelines recommendations, p = 0.09. Mean compression depth was 55 mm (10 mm) in the demonstration group compared with 52 mm (10 mm) in the lecture group, p = 0.05. Median tidal volume was 265 (192, 447) ml and 405 (262, 578) ml, p 
ISSN:0735-6757
1532-8171
DOI:10.1016/j.ajem.2019.06.008