Cargando…
Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial
BACKGROUND: Blended learning, defined as the combination of traditional face‐to‐face instructor‐led learning and e‐learning course, has never been validated as a teaching method for the effective use of manual defibrillators in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. AIM: To evaluate whether paediatric emerg...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290488/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34519140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nicc.12713 |
_version_ | 1784748912415866880 |
---|---|
author | Siebert, Johan N. Glangetas, Alban Grange, Marine Haddad, Kevin Courvoisier, Delphine S. Lacroix, Laurence |
author_facet | Siebert, Johan N. Glangetas, Alban Grange, Marine Haddad, Kevin Courvoisier, Delphine S. Lacroix, Laurence |
author_sort | Siebert, Johan N. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Blended learning, defined as the combination of traditional face‐to‐face instructor‐led learning and e‐learning course, has never been validated as a teaching method for the effective use of manual defibrillators in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. AIM: To evaluate whether paediatric emergency and critical care providers exposed to a blended learning session performed better and recalled more defibrillator skills than those exposed to face‐to‐face learning only. STUDY DESIGN: A two‐period prospective, stratified, single‐centre, simulation‐based, randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: Registered nurses and postgraduate residents from either a paediatric emergency department or an intensive care unit were randomly assigned to a blended learning or face‐to‐face learning sessions on the recommended use of a manual defibrillator. Participants' adherence to recommendations was assessed by testing defibrillator skills in three consecutive paediatric cardiopulmonary scenarios performed on the day of the training and once again 2 months later. The primary endpoint was the number of errors observed during defibrillation, cardioversion, and transcutaneous pacing at the time of the initial intervention. RESULTS: Fifty participants were randomized to receive the intervention and 51 to the control group. When pooling all three procedures, the median total errors per participant was lower (2 [IQR: 1‐4]) in providers exposed to blended learning than in those exposed to face‐to‐face learning only (3 [IQR: 2‐5]; P = .06). The median of total errors per procedure was also lower. However, both training methods appeared insufficient to maintain appropriate skill retention over time as a repetition of procedures 2 months later without any refresher learning session yielded more errors in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Learners exposed to blended learning showed a reduced number in the total amount of errors compared with those exposed to face‐to‐face learning alone, with waning of skills over time. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Proficiently teaching the use of a manual defibrillator can be performed through blended learning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9290488 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92904882022-07-20 Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial Siebert, Johan N. Glangetas, Alban Grange, Marine Haddad, Kevin Courvoisier, Delphine S. Lacroix, Laurence Nurs Crit Care Research BACKGROUND: Blended learning, defined as the combination of traditional face‐to‐face instructor‐led learning and e‐learning course, has never been validated as a teaching method for the effective use of manual defibrillators in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. AIM: To evaluate whether paediatric emergency and critical care providers exposed to a blended learning session performed better and recalled more defibrillator skills than those exposed to face‐to‐face learning only. STUDY DESIGN: A two‐period prospective, stratified, single‐centre, simulation‐based, randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: Registered nurses and postgraduate residents from either a paediatric emergency department or an intensive care unit were randomly assigned to a blended learning or face‐to‐face learning sessions on the recommended use of a manual defibrillator. Participants' adherence to recommendations was assessed by testing defibrillator skills in three consecutive paediatric cardiopulmonary scenarios performed on the day of the training and once again 2 months later. The primary endpoint was the number of errors observed during defibrillation, cardioversion, and transcutaneous pacing at the time of the initial intervention. RESULTS: Fifty participants were randomized to receive the intervention and 51 to the control group. When pooling all three procedures, the median total errors per participant was lower (2 [IQR: 1‐4]) in providers exposed to blended learning than in those exposed to face‐to‐face learning only (3 [IQR: 2‐5]; P = .06). The median of total errors per procedure was also lower. However, both training methods appeared insufficient to maintain appropriate skill retention over time as a repetition of procedures 2 months later without any refresher learning session yielded more errors in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Learners exposed to blended learning showed a reduced number in the total amount of errors compared with those exposed to face‐to‐face learning alone, with waning of skills over time. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Proficiently teaching the use of a manual defibrillator can be performed through blended learning. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2021-09-13 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9290488/ /pubmed/34519140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nicc.12713 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Nursing in Critical Care published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Critical Care Nurses. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Research Siebert, Johan N. Glangetas, Alban Grange, Marine Haddad, Kevin Courvoisier, Delphine S. Lacroix, Laurence Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial |
title | Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial |
title_full | Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial |
title_fullStr | Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial |
title_short | Impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: A simulation‐based randomized trial |
title_sort | impact of blended learning on manual defibrillator's use: a simulation‐based randomized trial |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290488/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34519140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/nicc.12713 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT siebertjohann impactofblendedlearningonmanualdefibrillatorsuseasimulationbasedrandomizedtrial AT glangetasalban impactofblendedlearningonmanualdefibrillatorsuseasimulationbasedrandomizedtrial AT grangemarine impactofblendedlearningonmanualdefibrillatorsuseasimulationbasedrandomizedtrial AT haddadkevin impactofblendedlearningonmanualdefibrillatorsuseasimulationbasedrandomizedtrial AT courvoisierdelphines impactofblendedlearningonmanualdefibrillatorsuseasimulationbasedrandomizedtrial AT lacroixlaurence impactofblendedlearningonmanualdefibrillatorsuseasimulationbasedrandomizedtrial |