• Bruce M Lo, Alicia S Devine, David P Evans, Donald V Byars, Olive Y Lamm, Rusty J Lee, Sean M Lowe, and Laura L Walker.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA 23507, USA. Brucelo1@yahoo.com
• Resuscitation. 2011 Nov 1;82(11):1440-3.

ObjectiveWe performed a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the retention of advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) knowledge between high-fidelity simulation training (HFST) and traditional training (TT) in medical students.MethodsMedical students were randomized to HFST or TT for their ACLS training. Students were then tested on 2 different mega-code scenarios immediately after their training and then 1-year later. A survey was performed asking their satisfaction of ACLS training and confidence of ACLS knowledge with a 10-point rating scale.Results93 students were randomized with 86 completing the study (HFST=45, TT=41). The HFST group scored a higher percentage correct on initial testing than the TT group (83% vs. 70%, P<0.0001). However at 1-year follow up, both groups performed the same (66% vs. 66%, P=0.84). Satisfaction with training was higher with the HFST compared to the TT group (9.0 vs. 7.8, P<0.0001). Confidence in ACLS knowledge between HFST and TT groups were similar at baseline (6.9 vs. 6.5, P=0.18) and at 1-year (4.8 vs. 4.5, P=0.46).ConclusionStudents demonstrated greater ACLS knowledge initially with HFST than with TT. However, after 1-year, both groups performed the same. Satisfaction with training was higher with HFST compared to TT. Confidence in ACLS knowledge was the same initially and decreased similarly over a 1-year time period regardless of the type of ACLS training. Further studies will need to determine optimal strategies to retain ACLS knowledge.Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

11 keywords...

hide…