The Effectiveness of Online-Only Blended Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training: Static-Group Comparison Study.

BACKGROUND: Basic life support (BLS) education is essential for improving bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) rates, but the imparting of such education faces obstacles during the outbreak of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19. When face-to-face teaching is limited, distance learning-blended learning (BL) or an online-only model-is encouraged. However, evidence regarding the effect of online-only CPR training is scarce, and comparative studies on classroom-based BL (CBL) are lacking. While other strategies have recommended self-directed learning and deliberate practice to enhance CPR education, no previous studies have incorporated all of these instructional methods into a BLS course. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to demonstrate a novel BLS training model-remote practice BL (RBL)-and compare its educational outcomes with those of the conventional CBL model. METHODS: A static-group comparison study was conducted. It included RBL and CBL courses that shared the same paradigm, comprising online lectures, a deliberate practice session with Little Anne quality CPR (QCPR) manikin feedback, and a final assessment session. In the main intervention, the RBL group was required to perform distant self-directed deliberate practice and complete the final assessment via an online video conference. Manikin-rated CPR scores were measured as the primary outcome; the number of retakes of the final examination was the secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 52 and 104 participants from the RBL and CBL groups, respectively, were eligible for data analysis. A comparison of the 2 groups revealed that there were more women in the RBL group than the CBL group (36/52, 69.2% vs 51/104, 49%, respectively; P=.02). After adjustment, there were no significant differences in scores for QCPR release (96.9 vs 96.4, respectively; P=.61), QCPR depth (99.2 vs 99.5, respectively; P=.27), or QCPR rate (94.9 vs 95.5, respectively; P=.83). The RBL group spent more days practicing before the final assessment (12.4 vs 8.9 days, respectively; P<.001) and also had a higher number of retakes (1.4 vs 1.1 times, respectively; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a remote practice BL-based method for online-only distant BLS CPR training. In terms of CPR performance, using remote self-directed deliberate practice was not inferior to the conventional classroom-based instructor-led method, although it tended to take more time to achieve the same effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Effects of different cardiopulmonary resuscitation education interventions among university students: A randomized controlled trial.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) education for the public may improve bystander intention to perform CPR on cardiac arrest patients. Studies have shown that different CPR education intervention methods can improve learning performance, with key indicators including attitude toward to CPR, intention to perform CPR, and degree of CPR knowledge and skills. The present study compared the traditional face-to-face method to hybrid and virtual reality (VR) methods to observe difference in learning performance and length of performance retention. This study adopted randomized controlled trial to compare CPR learning performance between traditional face-to-face, hybrid, and VR methods. Participants from each intervention group completed a pretest and 2 posttests. The measurement tools included an attitude and intention questionnaire, knowledge examination, and skill examination with a RESUSCI ANNE QCPR ® manikin. The performance among all participants in pretest showed no significant difference between the intervention groups, indicating no difference in their background attitude, knowledge, and skill level. Significant differences were observed in the average degree of intention to perform CPR between the hybrid and traditional groups in 1st and 2nd posttest. Compared to the pretest results, the posttests revealed significantly higher attitude toward CPR, intention to perform CPR, knowledge examination results, accuracy of overall chest compression, accuracy of CPR procedure, accuracy of AED usage, accuracy of chest compression rate, and accuracy of chest compression depth. The average time to reattending CPR learning and practice session was 11-12 weeks reported by participants. The hybrid and VR methods to CPR education resulted in the same level of improvement in learning performance as traditional face-to-face teaching. The suggested frequency for renewing CPR knowledge and skills is 12 weeks which may be considered in new strategies aimed at promoting CPR education and exposure to the public.

Attitude and behavior toward bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation during COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) for fear of transmission while breaking social distancing rules. The latest guidelines recommend hands-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and facemask use. However, public willingness in this setup remains unknown. METHODS: A cross-sectional, unrestricted volunteer Internet survey was conducted to assess individuals' attitudes and behaviors toward performing BCPR, pre-existing CPR training, occupational identity, age group, and gender. The raking method for weights and a regression analysis for the predictors of willingness were performed. RESULTS: Among 1,347 eligible respondents, 822 (61%) had negative attitudes toward performing BCPR. Healthcare providers (HCPs) and those with pre-existing CPR training had fewer negative attitudes (p < 0.001); HCPs and those with pre-existing CPR training and unchanged attitude showed more positive behaviors toward BCPR (p < 0.001). Further, 9.7% of the respondents would absolutely refuse to perform BCPR. In contrast, 16.9% would perform BCPR directly despite the outbreak. Approximately 9.9% would perform it if they were instructed, 23.5%, if they wore facemasks, and 40.1%, if they were to perform hands-only CPR. Interestingly, among the 822 respondents with negative attitudes, over 85% still tended to perform BCPR in the abovementioned situations. The weighted analysis showed similar results. The adjusted predictors for lower negative attitudes toward BCPR were younger age, being a man, and being an HCP; those for more positive behaviors were younger age and being an HCP. CONCLUSIONS: Outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, have negative impacts on attitudes and behaviors toward BCPR. Younger individuals, men, HCPs, and those with pre-existing CPR training tended to show fewer negative attitudes and behaviors. Meanwhile, most individuals with negative attitudes still expressed positive behaviors under safer measures such as facemask protection, hands-only CPR, and available dispatch instructions.