Log in to save to my catalogue

Traditional versus blended CPR training program: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study

Traditional versus blended CPR training program: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study

https://devfeature-collection.sl.nsw.gov.au/record/TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7308401

Traditional versus blended CPR training program: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study

About this item

Full title

Traditional versus blended CPR training program: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study

Publisher

London: Nature Publishing Group UK

Journal title

Scientific reports, 2020-06, Vol.10 (1), p.10032-10032, Article 10032

Language

English

Formats

Publication information

Publisher

London: Nature Publishing Group UK

More information

Scope and Contents

Contents

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training and its quality are critical in improving the survival rate of cardiac arrest. This randomized controlled study investigated the efficacy of a newly developed CPR training program for the public in a Taiwanese setting. A total of 832 adults were randomized to either a traditional or blended (18-minute e-learning plus 30-minute hands-on) compression-only CPR training program. The primary outcome was compression depth. Secondary outcomes included CPR knowledge test, practical test, quality of CPR performance, and skill retention. The mean compression depth was 5.21 cm and 5.24 cm in the blended and traditional groups, respectively. The mean difference in compression depth between groups was −0.04 (95% confidence interval −0.13 to infinity), demonstrating that the blended CPR training program was non-inferior to the traditional CPR training program in compression depth after initial training. Secondary outcome results were comparable between groups. Although the mean compression depth and rate were guideline-compliant, only half of the compressions were delivered with adequate depth and rate in both groups. CPR knowledge and skill retained similarly in both groups at 6 and 12 months after training. The blended CPR training program was non-inferior to the traditional CPR training program. However, there is still room for improvement in optimizing initial skill performance as well as skill retention. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03586752;
www.clinicaltrial.gov...

Alternative Titles

Full title

Traditional versus blended CPR training program: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study

Identifiers

Primary Identifiers

Record Identifier

TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7308401

Permalink

https://devfeature-collection.sl.nsw.gov.au/record/TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7308401

Other Identifiers

ISSN

2045-2322

E-ISSN

2045-2322

DOI

10.1038/s41598-020-67193-1

How to access this item