Emergency Center, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Hubei, 430071, Wuhan, China.
Hubei Clinical Research Center for Emergency and Resuscitation, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Jun 22;22(1):484. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03563-9.
The aim of this study was to compare one-month acquisition and half-a-year quality retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skills after initial training of medical students between peer videorecording feedback training (PVF) and traditional peer verbal feedback training (TVF).
Participants were randomly assigned to the PVF group (n = 62) and the TVF group (n = 65). All participants received a 45-min CPR training program performed by an American Heart Association basic life support-certified instructor, and then they began two hours of practice in groups. During interactive peer learning, students cooperated in couples of a doer and a helper to realize maximization of each other's learning. In the PVF group, training performance feedback came from peers based on practice videorecording. In the TVF group, feedback came from peers verbally without videorecording. CPR quality was tested at 1 and 6 months after training.
After 1 month of initial training, the PVF group had a better presentation of CPR skills acquisition than the TVF group. Compared to the TVF group, the PVF group had significantly higher total scores, compression depth, appropriate compression depth, and complete chest recoil (p < 0.05). Moreover, compression interruption was a significantly positive change in the PVF group compared to the TVF group (p < 0.05). However, after 6 months, proportions of appropriate compression depth in the PVF group were better than those in the TVF group (p < 0.05). The differences in total scores, compression depth, appropriate compression depth, complete chest recoil and compression interruption were non-significant (all p > 0.05).
Compared to TVF, PVF is more effective in enhancing CPR skill acquisition at 1 month. After half a year, CPR skill quality was obviously reduced in both groups, and no difference in CPR quality was found between the two groups.
本研究旨在比较医学生在初始培训后，通过同伴录像反馈培训（PVF）和传统同伴口头反馈培训（TVF），在一个月内获得心肺复苏（CPR）技能和半年内保持 CPR 技能质量的情况。
参与者被随机分配到 PVF 组（n=62）和 TVF 组（n=65）。所有参与者都接受了由美国心脏协会基础生命支持认证讲师进行的 45 分钟 CPR 培训计划，然后他们开始在小组中进行两小时的练习。在互动式同伴学习中，学生以一对一的形式合作，实现彼此学习的最大化。在 PVF 组中，培训表现反馈来自基于练习录像的同伴。在 TVF 组中，反馈来自没有录像的同伴口头反馈。在培训后 1 个月和 6 个月时测试 CPR 质量。
在初始培训后的 1 个月，PVF 组在 CPR 技能获得方面的表现优于 TVF 组。与 TVF 组相比，PVF 组的总得分、按压深度、适当的按压深度和完全的胸部回弹更高（p<0.05）。此外，与 TVF 组相比，PVF 组的按压中断有显著的积极变化（p<0.05）。然而，6 个月后，PVF 组的适当按压深度比例优于 TVF 组（p<0.05）。总得分、按压深度、适当的按压深度、完全的胸部回弹和按压中断的差异无统计学意义（均 p>0.05）。
与 TVF 相比，PVF 在 1 个月内更有效地提高 CPR 技能的获得。半年后，两组的 CPR 技能质量明显下降，两组的 CPR 质量无差异。
