Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Mais filtros

Intervalo de ano de publicação
Emergencias (Sant Vicenç dels Horts) ; 32(1): 45-48, feb. 2020. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS-Express | ID: ibc-ET2-3436


Objetivo. Evaluar los resultados de la formación mixta frente a la presencial en un curso de soporte vital básico/desfibrilador externo automático (SVB/DEA), así como su retención a los 9 meses. Método. Estudio experimental aleatorizado que compara los resultados de la formación en SVB/DEA entre un grupo control (GC) que recibió formación presencial de 4 horas frente a un grupo experimental (GE) que recibió formación en metodología mixta: 2 horas virtuales y 2 horas presenciales. Resultados. Participaron 89 alumnos (45 del GC y 44 del GE). Después de la formación, el GC obtuvo mejores puntuaciones en conocimientos [8,6 (DE 0,9) frente a 8,0 (DE 1,14), p = 0,013]. El GE obtuvo mejores puntuaciones en las habilidades del tiempo en segundos de "hands off" y en el porcentaje de la rexpansión completa del tórax. Los conocimientos decaen a los 9 meses, pero sin diferencias entre los dos grupos. La retención global baja de 8,31 (DE 1,1) a 6,04 (DE 1,6) (p = 0,001), en 9 meses, pero de forma similar en ambos grupos. En las habilidades prácticas no hubo diferencias entre los dos grupos ni al finalizar el curso ni a los 9 meses. Conclusiones. Con la metodología virtual se obtienen mejores resultados en algunos parámetros de las habilidades

Objective. To evaluate the immediate and 9-month results of blended versus standard training in basic life support and the use of an automatic external defibrillator (BLS/AED). Methods. Randomized trial comparing the results of standard BLS/AED training to blended training. The control group received 4 hours of standard instruction from a trainer and the experimental blended-training group received 2 hours of virtual training and 2 hours of in-person instruction. Results. Eighty-nine students participated, 45 in the control group and 44 in the experimental group. The controls achieved better mean (SD) knowledge scores immediately after training (8.6 [0.9] vs 8.0 [1.14] in the experimental group, P=.013). The blended training group scored better on certain skill markers (hands-off time in seconds and compressions followed by complete chest recoil). Participant knowledge had decreased at 9 months without significant between-group differences. Overall, retention fell from a score of 8.31 (1.1) to 6.04 (1.6) (P=.001) in 9 months and the loss was similar in the 2 groups. No differences in practical skills between the groups were observed at the end of the course or 9 months later. Conclusions. The blended training method led to better results on some skill ítems

Resuscitation ; 134: 127-132, 2019 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30428308


BACKGROUND: The use of online teaching methodology for basic life support (BLS) courses is progressively increasing. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to verify whether the blended-learning methodology (virtual course with a short face-to-face complement) was more efficient than a course that followed the classical or face-to-face methodology in our university. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cost minimization analysis was performed for two BLS and automatic external defibrillation (AED) courses, one of which was conducted face-to-face (Control Group) and the second of which was conducted via blended-learning (Experimental Group). The courses had the same duration and content according to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) recommendations. In the face-to-face course, direct costs were considered those generated by the faculty and derived from the academic activity. Other costs were those generated by the use of classrooms and the amortization of manikins and AED training. The perspective of the analysis was that of the provider, the academic, and a time horizon of six months. The costs are expressed in € 2017. RESULTS: The savings of a course in BLS-AED based on the blended-learning methodology calculated for a total of 160 university nursing and medical students were € 2328.8 for the first year of its implementation and € 9048.8 for its second edition compared with the same course using a face-to-face methodology. CONCLUSIONS: The blended-learning methodology supposes a cost savings for BLS-AED courses, mainly due to the reduction of expenses of the teaching staff. The blended-learning methodology seems to be more efficient than the face-to-face methodology.

Nurse Educ Today ; 65: 232-238, 2018 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29605787


AIM OF THE STUDY: The objective of this study was to compare the immediate and 6-month efficacy of basic life support (BLS) and automatic external defibrillation (AED) training using standard or blended methods. METHODS: First-year students of medicine and nursing (n = 129) were randomly assigned to a control group (face-to-face training based on the European Resuscitation Council [ERC] Guidelines) or to an experimental group that trained with a self-training video, a new website, a Moodle platform, an intelligent manikin, and 45 min of instructor presence. Both groups were homogeneous and were evaluated identically. Theoretical knowledge was evaluated using a multi-choice questionnaire (MCQ). Skill performance was evaluated by the instructor's rubric and on a high-fidelity Resusci Anne QCPR manikin. RESULTS: Immediately after the course, there were no statistically significant differences in knowledge between the two groups. The median score of practical evaluation assessed by the instructor was significantly better in the experimental group (8.15, SD 0.93 vs 7.7, SD 1.18; P = 0.02). No differences between groups were found when using a high-fidelity manikin to evaluate chest compressions and lung inflations. At six months, the scores in knowledge and skill performance were significantly lower compared to the evaluations at the end of the instruction, but they remained still higher compared to baseline. The experimental group had higher scores in practical skills evaluated by the instructor than the control group (7.44, SD 1.85 vs 6.10, SD 2.6; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The blended method provides the same or even higher levels of knowledge and skills than standard instruction both immediately after the course and six months later.

Reanimação Cardiopulmonar/educação , Competência Clínica/normas , Desfibriladores/psicologia , Estudantes/psicologia , Ensino/normas , Reanimação Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Avaliação Educacional/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Adulto Jovem
Anesthesiology ; 113(6): 1338-50, 2010 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21045639


BACKGROUND: Current knowledge of the risk for postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) rests on studies that narrowly selected patients and procedures. Hypothesizing that PPC occurrence could be predicted from a reduced set of perioperative variables, we aimed to develop a predictive index for a broad surgical population. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgical procedures given general, neuraxial, or regional anesthesia in 59 hospitals were randomly selected for this prospective, multicenter study. The main outcome was the development of at least one of the following: respiratory infection, respiratory failure, bronchospasm, atelectasis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or aspiration pneumonitis. The cohort was randomly divided into a development subsample to construct a logistic regression model and a validation subsample. A PPC predictive index was constructed. RESULTS: Of 2,464 patients studied, 252 events were observed in 123 (5%). Thirty-day mortality was higher in patients with a PPC (19.5%; 95% [CI], 12.5-26.5%) than in those without a PPC (0.5%; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8%). Regression modeling identified seven independent risk factors: low preoperative arterial oxygen saturation, acute respiratory infection during the previous month, age, preoperative anemia, upper abdominal or intrathoracic surgery, surgical duration of at least 2 h, and emergency surgery. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 90% (95% CI, 85-94%) for the development subsample and 88% (95% CI, 84-93%) for the validation subsample. CONCLUSION: The risk index based on seven objective, easily assessed factors has excellent discriminative ability. The index can be used to assess individual risk of PPC and focus further research on measures to improve patient care.

Pneumopatias/diagnóstico , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anestesia , Estudos de Coortes , Coleta de Dados/normas , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Modelos Logísticos , Pneumopatias/epidemiologia , Pneumopatias/mortalidade , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , População , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Prospectivos , Respiração Artificial , Fatores de Risco , Tamanho da Amostra , Estações do Ano , Espanha/epidemiologia , Resultado do Tratamento