Khoshbaten Manouchehr, Soleimanpour Hassan, Ala Alireza, Shams Vahdati Samad, Ebrahimian Kimia, Safari Saeid, Golzari Samad Ej, Salek Ranjbarzadeh Fariba, Mehdizadeh Esfanjani Robab
Medical Education Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran.
Cardiovascular Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Feb 8;4(1):e15546. doi: 10.5812/aapm.15546. eCollection 2014 Feb.
Conventional educational systems seem to be improper throughout the cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) teaching process. The most common causes of failed resuscitation are unfamiliarity with cardiopulmonary resuscitation algorithms, poor performance of leader of the CPR team and lack of skilled personnel, coordination among members during resuscitation, and responsibility of staff.
Electronic learning, as a new educational method is controversial issue in medical education for improving physicians' practical knowledge and it is inevitable that further research on its effectiveness should be done.
The present study is a prospective, pre- and post-educational, cross-sectional research, in which 84 interns were randomly divided into two groups. pre- and post- educational interventions that took place in the Department of Emergency Medicine, interns were evaluated by 21 multiple choice questions related to American Heart Association guidelineson cardiopulmonary resuscitation drugs. Questions were assessed in terms of routes for CPR drugs administration, CPR drug dosage forms, clinical judgment and appropriate CPR drug administration, and the alternative drugs in emergency situations. Data were analyzed by generalized estimating equations regression models and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Evaluating the effectiveness of both educational methods revealed that the mean answering score for 21 questions before education was 7.5 ± 2.6 and no significant difference was observed in groups (P = 0.55). However, after education, the average scores significantly increased to 11.0 ± 3.9 (P < 0.001). Electronic learning method was not associated with considerable increase in the knowledge of interns in this group compared with the lecture-based group (P = 0.49).
No significant differences were observed between electronic learning and lecture-based education in improving interns' knowledge of CPR drugs.
传统教育系统在心肺复苏（CPR）教学过程中似乎并不合适。复苏失败的最常见原因包括不熟悉心肺复苏算法、CPR团队领导者表现不佳、缺乏技术人员、复苏过程中成员之间缺乏协调以及工作人员的责任感。
电子学习作为一种新的教育方法，在医学教育中对于提高医生的实践知识是一个有争议的问题，因此有必要对其有效性进行进一步研究。
本研究是一项前瞻性、教育前后的横断面研究，84名实习生被随机分为两组。在急诊科进行教育干预前后，通过21道与美国心脏协会心肺复苏药物指南相关的多项选择题对实习生进行评估。问题从CPR药物给药途径、CPR药物剂型、临床判断和适当的CPR药物给药以及紧急情况下的替代药物等方面进行评估。数据通过广义估计方程回归模型进行分析，P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
对两种教育方法有效性的评估显示，教育前21道问题的平均回答分数为7.5 ± 2.6，两组之间未观察到显著差异（P = 0.55）。然而，教育后，平均分数显著提高到11.0 ± 3.9（P < 0.001）。与基于讲座的组相比，该组中电子学习方法与实习生知识的显著增加无关（P = 0.49）。
在提高实习生对CPR药物知识方面，电子学习和基于讲座的教育之间未观察到显著差异。
