scholarly journals Learning Outcome After Different Combinations of Seven Learning Activities in Basic Life Support on Laypersons in Workplaces: a Cluster Randomised, Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene Bylow ◽  
Thomas Karlsson ◽  
Margret Lepp ◽  
Andreas Claesson ◽  
Jonny Lindqvist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chest Compression ◽  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Learning Outcome ◽  
Learning Activities ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Reflective Questions ◽  
Web Based Education

Abstract Background The goal for laypersons after training in basic life support (BLS) is to act effectively in an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest situation. However, it is still unclear whether BLS training targeting laypersons at workplaces is optimal or whether other effective learning activities are possible. Aim The primary aim was to evaluate whether there were other modes of BLS training that improved learning outcome as compared with a control group, i.e. standard BLS training, six months after training, and secondarily directly after training. Methods In this multi-arm trial, lay participants (n = 2623) from workplaces were cluster randomised into 16 different BLS interventions, of which one, instructor-led and film-based BLS training, was classified as control and standard, with which the other 15 were compared. The learning outcome was the total score for practical skills in BLS calculated using the modified Cardiff Test. Results Four different training modes showed a significantly higher total score compared with standard (mean difference 2.3–2.9). The highest score was for the BLS intervention including a preparatory web-based education, instructor-led training, film-based instructions, reflective questions and a chest compression feedback device (95% CI for difference 0.9–5.0), 6 months after training. Conclusion BLS training adding several different combinations of a preparatory web-based education, reflective questions and chest compression feedback to instructor-led training and film-based instructions obtained higher modified Cardiff Test total scores 6 months after training compared with standard BLS training alone. The differences were small in magnitude and the clinical relevance of our findings needs to be further explored. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03618888. Registered August 07, 2018—Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03618888

Effectiveness of education intervention programme on life support measures for the nurses working in emergency unit of BPKIHS: a pre-experimental study

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-19
Author(s):  
Upendra Yadav ◽  
RS Mehta
Keyword(s):  
Chest Compression ◽  
Emergency Service ◽  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Health Sciences ◽  
Education Intervention ◽  
Advance Life Support ◽  
Intervention Programme ◽  
Support Measures

Introduction: Lack of resuscitation skills of nurses in basic life support (BLS) and advanced life support (ALS) has been identified as a contributing factor to poor outcomes of cardiac arrest victims.Objective: To assess the effectiveness of education intervention programme to improve the knowledge of, and thereby the quality of Emergency service; especially in the area of Basic Life Support, Advance Life Support and Triage system.Method: Pre-experimental research design was used to conduct the study among the nurses working in Emergency units of B. P. Koirala Institute of Health Sciences where CPR is very commonly performed. Using convenient sampling technique, a total of 24 nurses agreed to participate and to give consent were included in the study. The theoretical, demonstration and re-demonstration sessions were arranged, involving the trained doctors and nurses during the three hours educational programme. Post-test was carried out after education intervention programme. The 2010 BLS and ALS guidelines were used as guide for the study contents. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS-15 software.Result: It was found that there is significant increase in knowledge after education intervention in the components of life support measures (BLS/ALS) i.e. ratio of chest compression to ventilation in BLS (P= 0.001), correct sequence of CPR (p< 0.001), rate of chest compression in ALS (P= 0.001), the depth of chest compression in adult CPR (p< 0.001), and position of chest compression in CPR (P= 0.016). The participating nurses well appreciated the programme and requested to continue in future for all the nurses.Conclusion: The workshop certainly improves the knowledge of the working nurses, and thereby the quality of Emergency service; especially in the areas of Basic Life Support, Advance Life Support and Triage System.Journal of BP Koirala Institute of Health Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018, page: 14-19

scholarly journals The potential of leg-foot chest compression as an alternative to conventional hands-on compression during cardiopulmonary resuscitation

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki Takahashi ◽  
Takeji Saitoh ◽  
Misaki Okada ◽  
Hiroshi Satoh ◽  
Toshiya Akai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ◽  
Chest Compression ◽  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Vital Signs ◽  
Borg Scale ◽  
Compression Depth ◽  
Hands On ◽  
Scale Scores

Background: Conventional hands-on chest compression, in cardiopulmonary resuscitation, is often inadequate, especially when the rescuers are weak or have a small physique. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the potential of leg-foot chest compression, with and without a footstool, during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods and Results: We prospectively enrolled 21 medical workers competent in basic life support. They performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation on a manikin for 2 min using conventional hands-on compression (HO), leg-foot compression (LF), and leg-foot compression with a footstool (LF + FS). We analyzed the compression depths, changes in the rescuers’ vital signs, and the modified Borg scale scores after the trials. The compression depth did not differ between the cases using HO and LF. In the case of LF + FS, compression depths ⩾5 cm were more frequently observed (median, inter-quartile range: 93%, 81%–100%) than in HO (9%, 0%–57%, p < 0.01) and LF (28%, 11%–47%, p < 0.01). The increase in the heart rate or modified Borg scale scores, after the trials, did not differ between the HO and LF group; however, the values were the lowest in the case of LF + FS (49 ± 18 beats/min and 5 (4–7) in HO, 46 ± 18 and 6 (5–7) in LF, and 32 ± 11 and 2 (1–3) in LF + FS, respectively, p < 0.01). However, the increase in blood pressure, SpO2, and respiratory rate were not different among each group. The increases in the heart rate and modified Borg scale scores negatively were correlated with the rescuers’ body size, in the case of HO and LF, but not LF + FS. Conclusion: LF can be used as an alternative to HO, when adequate HO is difficult. LF + FS could be used when rescuers are weak or have a small physique and when the victims are bigger than the rescuers.

The impact of quantitative feedback on the performance of chest compression by basic life support trained clinical staff

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 ◽  
pp. 163-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Johnson ◽  
Amanda Peat ◽  
Leanne Boyd ◽  
Tanya Warren ◽  
Kathryn Eastwood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chest Compression ◽  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Clinical Staff ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Differences in Basic Life Support Knowledge Between Junior Medical Students and Lay People: Web-Based Questionnaire Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludovic Sturny ◽  
Simon Regard ◽  
Robert Larribau ◽  
Marc Niquille ◽  
Georges Louis Savoldelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
Emergency Medical Dispatch ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Lay People ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The University ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND Early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and prompt defibrillation markedly increase the survival rate in case of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). As future healthcare professionals, medical students should be trained to efficiently manage an unexpectedly encountered OHCA. OBJECTIVE Our aim was to assess basic life support (BLS) knowledge in junior medical students at the University of Geneva Faculty of Medicine (UGFM) and to compare it with that of the general population. METHODS Junior UGFM students and lay people who had registered to BLS classes given by a red-cross affiliated center were sent invitation links to complete a web-based questionnaire. The primary outcome was the between-group difference on a 10-question score. Secondary outcomes were the differences in the rate of correct answers for each individual question and in the level of self-assessed confidence in the ability to perform resuscitation. RESULTS The mean score was higher in medical students than in lay people (5.8±1.7 vs 4.2±1.7, P<.001). Although the phone number of the emergency medical dispatch center was well known (94% vs 82%, P=.06), most participants were unable to identify the criteria used to recognize OHCA, and almost none were able to correctly reorganize the BLS sequence. Medical students felt more confident than lay people in their ability to perform resuscitation (4.7±2.2 vs 3.1±2.1, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS Although junior medical students were more knowledgeable than lay people regarding BLS procedures, the proportion of correct answers was low in both groups, and changes in BLS education policy should be considered.

Abstract 151: Do the Simplified 2015 ERC Guidelines Improve Basic Life Support Performance Compared to 2010 ERC Guidelines?

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 138 (Suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dung T Nguyen ◽  
Kasper G Lauridsen ◽  
Josephine Johnsen ◽  
Katrine B Bomholt ◽  
Bo Løfgren
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medical Service ◽  
Chest Compression ◽  
Medical Service ◽  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Emergency Medical ◽  
Resuscitation Guidelines ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Service Call ◽  
Erc Guidelines

Background: The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) 2015 basic life support (BLS) algorithm has been simplified compared with the ERC 2010 BLS algorithm. Simplification of resuscitation guidelines may facilitate learning and improve guidelines adherence. This study aimed to study BLS performance using ERC 2015 compared with ERC 2010 guidelines. Methods: This is an observational study including video recordings of laypersons being skill tested after participation in a standardized ERC BLS/AED course using either the simplified ERC 2015 or ERC 2010 guidelines. The endpoints were 1) performing all steps of the BLS/AED algorithm correctly, 2) remembering the sequence of actions of the BLS/AED algorithm, 3) time to emergency medical service call, 4) time to first chest compression and 5) time to first shock. Results: We analyzed videos of 100 laypersons (50 trained using the simplified 2015 guidelines and 50 trained using the 2010 guidelines). Overall, 78% and 62% correctly performed all of the steps of the 2015 and 2010 guidelines respectively (p=0.08), whereas 94% and 82% remembered the correct sequence of actions of the 2015 and 2010 algorithms, respectively (p=0.06). There was no significant difference between participants following the 2015 vs 2010 algorithms with respect to time to emergency medical service call (difference: 0 sec, (95% confidence interval (CI): -3; 2) P=0.70), time to first chest compression (difference: 0 sec, (95% CI: -3;3) P=1.00), and time to first shock (difference: 0 sec, (95% CI: -6; 7) P=0.90). Conclusion: Laypersons tends to better perform resuscitation and adhere to the BLS algorithm when using the simplified ERC 2015 guidelines compared to the 2010 Guidelines. There were however no differences in time to emergency medical service call, time to first chest compression and shock delivery.

scholarly journals Self-learning training versus instructor-led training for basic life support: A cluster randomised trial

Resuscitation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 139 ◽  
pp. 122-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene Bylow ◽  
Thomas Karlsson ◽  
Andreas Claesson ◽  
Margret Lepp ◽  
Jonny Lindqvist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Self Learning
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document