Cargando…

The nationwide impact of COVID-19 on life support courses. A retrospective evaluation by Resuscitation Council UK

AIM: To determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Resuscitation Council UK Advanced Life Support (ALS) and Immediate Life Support (ILS) course numbers and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a before-after study using course data from the Resuscitation Council UK Learning Management System betwee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thorne, C.J., Kimani, P.K., Hampshire, S., Hamilton-Bower, I., Begum-Ali, S., Benson-Clarke, A., Couper, K., Yeung, J., Lockey, A., Perkins, G.D., Soar, J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9922585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36816597
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100366
Descripción
Sumario:AIM: To determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Resuscitation Council UK Advanced Life Support (ALS) and Immediate Life Support (ILS) course numbers and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a before-after study using course data from the Resuscitation Council UK Learning Management System between January 2018 and December 2021, using 23 March 2020 as the cut-off between pre- and post-pandemic periods. Demographics and outcomes were analysed using chi-squared tests and regression models. RESULTS: There were 90,265 ALS participants (51,464 pre-; 38,801 post-) and 368,140 ILS participants (225,628 pre-; 142,512 post-). There was a sharp decline in participants on ALS/ILS courses due to COVID-19. ALS participant numbers rebounded to exceed pre-pandemic levels, whereas ILS numbers recovered to a lesser degree with increased uptake of e-learning versions. Mean ALS course participants reduced from 20.0 to 14.8 post-pandemic (P < 0.001). Post-pandemic there were small but statistically significant decreases in ALS Cardiac Arrest Simulation Test pass rates (from 82.1 % to 80.1 % (OR = 0.90, 95 % CI = 0.86–0.94, P < 0.001)), ALS MCQ score (from 86.6 % to 86.0 % (mean difference = -0.35, 95 % CI −0.44 to −0.26, P < 0.001)), and overall ALS course results (from 95.2 %to 94.7 %, OR = 0.92, CI = 0.85–0.99, P = 0.023). ILS course outcomes were similar post-pandemic (from 99.4 % to 99.4 %, P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 caused a sharp decline in the number of participants on ALS/ILS courses and an accelerated uptake of e-learning versions, with the average ALS course size reducing significantly. The small reduction in performance on ALS courses requires further research to clarify the contributing factors.