We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Retention of CPR skills learned in a traditional AHA Heartsaver course versus 30-min video self-training: a controlled randomized study.
Resuscitation 2007 September
BACKGROUND: Bystander CPR improves outcomes after out of hospital cardiac arrest. The length of current 4-h classes in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a barrier to more widespread dissemination of CPR training and older adults in particular are underrepresented in traditional classes. Training with a brief video self-instruction (VSI) program has shown that this type of training can produce short-term skill performance at least as good as that seen with traditional American Heart Association (AHA) Heartsaver training, although it is unclear whether there is comparable skill retention.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Two hundred and eight-five adults between the ages of 40 and 70 who had no CPR training within the past 5 years were assigned at random to a no-training control group, Heartsaver (HS) training, or one of three versions of brief VSI (i.e., self-trained-ST subjects). Post-training performance of CPR skills was assessed in a scenario format by human examiners and by sensored manikin at Time 1 (immediately post-training) and again at Time 2 (2 months post-training). Performance by controls was assessed only once. Significant (P<.001) decline was observed in the three measures recorded by examiners; assess responsiveness (from 72% to 60% for HS subjects and from 90% to 77% for ST subjects), call 911 (from 82% to 74% for HS subjects and from 71% to 53% for ST subjects), and overall performance (from 42% to 30% for HS subjects and from 60% to 44% for ST subjects). Significant (P<.001) decline was observed in two of three skills measured by a sensored manikin: ventilation volume (from 40% to 36% for HS subjects and from 61% to 41% for ST subjects, with a significant [P=.028] interaction) and correct hand placement (from 68% to 59% for HS subjects and from 80% to 64% for ST subjects). Heartsaver and self-trained subjects generally showed similar rates of decline. At Time 2, examiners rated trained subjects better than untrained controls in all skills except calling 911, where self-trained subjects did not differ from controls; manikin data revealed that trained subjects' performance was better than that of controls for ventilation volume, but had declined to the level of controls for both hand placement and compression depth.
CONCLUSIONS: Adults between 40 and 70 years of age who participated in a CPR VSI program experienced performance decline in their CPR skills after a post-training interval of 2 months. However, this decline was no greater than that seen in subjects who took Heartsaver training. The VSI program produced retention performance at least as good as that seen with traditional training. Additional effort is needed to improve both initial performance and retention of CPR skills.
CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Retention of CPR skills was compared 2 months post-training for adults between 40 and 70 years old who had taken either a traditional Heartsaver CPR course or a 22-min video self-directed training course. Although performance declines occurred in the 2-month interval, self-trained subjects generally demonstrated CPR skill retention equivalent to that of Heartsaver-trained subjects, although for both groups skill decline on some measures reached the level of untrained controls.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Two hundred and eight-five adults between the ages of 40 and 70 who had no CPR training within the past 5 years were assigned at random to a no-training control group, Heartsaver (HS) training, or one of three versions of brief VSI (i.e., self-trained-ST subjects). Post-training performance of CPR skills was assessed in a scenario format by human examiners and by sensored manikin at Time 1 (immediately post-training) and again at Time 2 (2 months post-training). Performance by controls was assessed only once. Significant (P<.001) decline was observed in the three measures recorded by examiners; assess responsiveness (from 72% to 60% for HS subjects and from 90% to 77% for ST subjects), call 911 (from 82% to 74% for HS subjects and from 71% to 53% for ST subjects), and overall performance (from 42% to 30% for HS subjects and from 60% to 44% for ST subjects). Significant (P<.001) decline was observed in two of three skills measured by a sensored manikin: ventilation volume (from 40% to 36% for HS subjects and from 61% to 41% for ST subjects, with a significant [P=.028] interaction) and correct hand placement (from 68% to 59% for HS subjects and from 80% to 64% for ST subjects). Heartsaver and self-trained subjects generally showed similar rates of decline. At Time 2, examiners rated trained subjects better than untrained controls in all skills except calling 911, where self-trained subjects did not differ from controls; manikin data revealed that trained subjects' performance was better than that of controls for ventilation volume, but had declined to the level of controls for both hand placement and compression depth.
CONCLUSIONS: Adults between 40 and 70 years of age who participated in a CPR VSI program experienced performance decline in their CPR skills after a post-training interval of 2 months. However, this decline was no greater than that seen in subjects who took Heartsaver training. The VSI program produced retention performance at least as good as that seen with traditional training. Additional effort is needed to improve both initial performance and retention of CPR skills.
CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Retention of CPR skills was compared 2 months post-training for adults between 40 and 70 years old who had taken either a traditional Heartsaver CPR course or a 22-min video self-directed training course. Although performance declines occurred in the 2-month interval, self-trained subjects generally demonstrated CPR skill retention equivalent to that of Heartsaver-trained subjects, although for both groups skill decline on some measures reached the level of untrained controls.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app