Assessing basic life support skills without an instructor: is it possible?

BMC Medical Education

Koenraad G Monsieurs²  Martin A Valcke³  Bram De Wever³  Nicolas Mpotos¹ 

[1]Emergency Department, Ghent University Hospital, De Pintelaan 185, Ghent, B-9000, Belgium

[2]Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, Wilrijk, B-2610, Belgium

[3]Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, H. Dunantlaan 2, Ghent, B-9000, Belgium

关键词: Self-directed learning;    Cardiopulmonary resuscitation;    Basic Life Support;    Automated testing;   

Others  :  1153567
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-12-58

 received in 2011-12-18, accepted in 2012-07-23,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Current methods to assess Basic Life Support skills (BLS; chest compressions and ventilations) require the presence of an instructor. This is time-consuming and comports instructor bias. Since BLS skills testing is a routine activity, it is potentially suitable for automation. We developed a fully automated BLS testing station without instructor by using innovative software linked to a training manikin. The goal of our study was to investigate the feasibility of adequate testing (effectiveness) within the shortest period of time (efficiency).

Methods

As part of a randomised controlled trial investigating different compression depth training strategies, 184 medicine students received an individual appointment for a retention test six months after training. An interactive Flash^TM (Adobe Systems Inc., USA) user interface was developed, to guide the students through the testing procedure after login, while Skills Station^TM software (Laerdal Medical, Norway) automatically recorded compressions and ventilations and their duration (“time on task”). In a subgroup of 29 students the room entrance and exit time was registered to assess efficiency. To obtain a qualitative insight of the effectiveness, student’s perceptions about the instructional organisation and about the usability of the fully automated testing station were surveyed.

Results

During testing there was incomplete data registration in two students and one student performed compressions only. The average time on task for the remaining 181 students was three minutes (SD 0.5). In the subgroup, the average overall time spent in the testing station was 7.5 minutes (SD 1.4). Mean scores were 5.3/6 (SD 0.5, range 4.0-6.0) for instructional organisation and 5.0/6 (SD 0.61, range 3.1-6.0) for usability. Students highly appreciated the automated testing procedure.

Conclusions

Our automated testing station was an effective and efficient method to assess BLS skills in medicine students. Instructional organisation and usability were judged to be very good. This method enables future formative assessment and certification procedures to be carried out without instructor involvement.

Trial registration

B67020097543

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Mpotos et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Van Hoeyweghen RJ, Bossaert L, Mullie A, Calle P, Martens P, Buylaert WA, Delooz H: Quality and efficiency of bystander CPR. Belgian Cerebral Resuscitation Study Group. Resuscitation 1993, 26:47-52.
• [2]Cummins RO, Eisenberg MS: Pre-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation: is it effective? JAMA 1985, 253:2408-2412.
• [3]Gallagher EJ, Lombardi G, Gennis P: Effectiveness of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. JAMA 1995, 274:1922-1925.
• [4]Swor RA, Jackson RE, Cynar M, Sadler E, Basse E, Boji B, Rivera-Rivera EJ, Maher A, Grubb W, Jacobson R, Dalbec DL: Bystander CPR, ventricular fibrillation, and survival in witnessed, unmonitored out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Ann Emerg Med 1995, 25:780-784.
• [5]Wik L, Steen PA, Bircher NG: Quality of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation influences outcome after pre-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 1994, 28:195-203.
• [6]Soar J, Mancini ME, Bhanji F, Billi JE, Dennett J, Finn J, Ma MH, Perkins GD, Rodgers DL, Hazinski MF, Jacobs I, Morley PT: Part 12: Education, implementation, and teams: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations. Resuscitation 2010, 81(Suppl 1):e288-e330.
• [7]Lynch B, Einspruch EL, Nichol G, Aufderheide TP: Assessment of BLS skills: Optimizing use of instructor and manikin measures. Resuscitation 2008, 76:233-243.
• [8]Holzinger A: Usability engineering methods for software developers. Communications of the ACM 2005, 48:71-74.
• [9]Mpotos N, Lemoyne S, Wyler B, Deschepper E, Herregods L, Calle PA, Valcke MA, Monsieurs KG: Training to deeper compression depth reduces shallow compressions after six months in a manikin model. Resuscitation 2011, 82:1323-1327.
• [10]Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ: Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272 webcite
• [11]O’Connor BP: SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods 2000. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807 webcite
• [12]Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger HL: Repeated testing improves long-term retention relative to repeated study: a randomised controlled trial. Medical Education 2009, 43:1174-1181.
• [13]Roediger HL, Karpicke JD: The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2006, 1:181-276.
• [14]Kromann CB, Jensen ML, Ringsted C: The effect of testing on skills learning. Medical Education 2009, 43:21-7.
• [15]Kromann CB, Bohnstedt C, Jensen ML, Ringsted C: The testing effect on skills learning might last 6 months. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10459-009-9207-x webcite
• [16]Sutton RM, Niles D, Meaney PA, Aplenc R, French B, Abella BS, Lengetti EL, Berg RA, Helfaer MA, Nadkarni V: Low-dose, high-frequency CPR training improves skill retention of in-hospital pediatric providers. Pediatrics 2011, 128:e145-151.