Nord Anette, Hult Håkan, Kreitz-Sandberg Susanne, Herlitz Johan, Svensson Leif, Nilsson Lennart
Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
BMJ Open. 2017 Jun 23;7(6):e014230. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014230.
The aim of this research is to investigate if two additional interventions, test and reflection, after standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training facilitate learning by comparing 13-year-old students' practical skills and willingness to act.
Seventh grade students in council schools of two municipalities in south-east Sweden.
School classes were randomised to CPR training only (O), CPR training with a practical test including feedback (T) or CPR training with reflection and a practical test including feedback (RT). Measures of practical skills and willingness to act in a potential life-threatening situation were studied directly after training and at 6 months using a digital reporting system and a survey. A modified Cardiff test was used to register the practical skills, where scores in each of 12 items resulted in a total score of 12-48 points. The study was conducted in accordance with current European Resuscitation Council guidelines during December 2013 to October 2014.
29 classes for a total of 587 seventh grade students were included in the study.
The total score of the modified Cardiff test at 6 months was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the total score directly after training, the 12 individual items of the modified Cardiff test and willingness to act.
At 6 months, the T and O groups scored 32 (3.9) and 30 (4.0) points, respectively (p<0.001), while the RT group scored 32 (4.2) points (not significant when compared with T). There were no significant differences in willingness to act between the groups after 6 months.
A practical test including feedback directly after training improved the students' acquisition of practical CPR skills. Reflection did not increase further CPR skills. At 6-month follow-up, no intervention effect was found regarding willingness to make a life-saving effort.
本研究旨在通过比较13岁学生的实践技能和行动意愿,调查在标准心肺复苏(CPR)培训后增加测试和反思这两种干预措施是否有助于学习。
瑞典东南部两个市议会学校的七年级学生。
学校班级被随机分为仅接受CPR培训(O组)、接受包括反馈的实践测试的CPR培训(T组)或接受反思及包括反馈的实践测试的CPR培训(RT组)。在培训后立即和6个月时,使用数字报告系统和一项调查研究在潜在危及生命的情况下的实践技能和行动意愿的测量指标。采用改良的加的夫测试来记录实践技能,12个项目中每个项目的得分产生12 - 48分的总分。该研究于2013年12月至2014年10月按照欧洲复苏委员会当前指南进行。
29个班级,共587名七年级学生纳入研究。
6个月时改良加的夫测试的总分是主要结局。次要结局是培训后立即的总分、改良加的夫测试的12个单项以及行动意愿。
6个月时,T组和O组的得分分别为32(3.9)分和30(4.0)分(p<0.001),而RT组得分为32(4.2)分(与T组相比无显著差异)。6个月后,各组之间的行动意愿没有显著差异。
培训后立即进行包括反馈的实践测试可提高学生对CPR实践技能的掌握。反思并未进一步提高CPR技能。在6个月随访时,未发现干预对进行救生努力的意愿有影响。