• Prehosp Emerg Care · May 2017

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Controlled Clinical Trial

    Retention of Basic Life Support in Laypeople: Mastery Learning vs. Time-based Education.

    • Sylvain Boet, M Dylan Bould, Ashlee-Ann Pigford, Bernhard Rössler, Pratheeban Nambyiah, Qi Li, Alexandra Bunting, and Karl Schebesta.
    • Prehosp Emerg Care. 2017 May 1; 21 (3): 362-377.

    ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of a mastery learning (ML) versus a time-based (TB) BLS course for the acquisition and retention of BLS knowledge and skills in laypeople.MethodsAfter ethics approval, laypeople were randomized to a ML or TB BLS course based on the American Heart Association (AHA) Heartsaver course. In the ML group, subjects practiced and received feedback at six BLS stations until they reached a pre-determined level of performance. The TB group received a standard AHA six-station BLS course. All participants took the standard in-course BLS skills test at the end of their course. BLS skills and knowledge were tested using a high-fidelity scenario and knowledge questionnaire upon course completion (immediate post-test) and after four months (retention test). Video recorded scenarios were assessed by two blinded, independent raters using the AHA skills checklist.ResultsForty-three subjects were included in analysis (23ML;20TB). For primary outcome, subjects' performance did not change after four months, regardless of the teaching modality (TB from (median[IQR]) 8.0[6.125;8.375] to 8.5[5.625;9.0] vs. ML from 8.0[7.0;9.0] to 7.0[6.0;8.0], p = 0.12 for test phase, p = 0.21 for interaction between effect of teaching modality and test phase). For secondary outcomes, subjects acquired knowledge between pre- and immediate post-tests (p < 0.005), and partially retained the acquired knowledge up to four months (p < 0.005) despite a decrease between immediate post-test and retention test (p = 0.009), irrespectively of the group (p = 0.59) (TB from 63.3[48.3;73.3] to 93.3[81.7;100.0] and then 93.3[81.7;93.3] vs. ML from 60.0[46.7;66.7] to 93.3[80.0;100.0] and then 80.0[73.3;93.3]). Regardless of the group after 4 months, chest compression depth improved (TB from 39.0[35.0;46.0] to 48.5[40.25;58.0] vs. ML from 40.0[37.0;47.0] to 45.0[37.0;52.0]; p = 0.012), but not the rate (TB from 118.0[114.0;125.0] to 120.5[113.0;129.5] vs. ML from 119.0[113.0;130.0] to 123.0[102.0;132.0]; p = 0.70). All subjects passed the in-course BLS skills test. Pass/fail rates were poor in both groups at both the simulated immediate post-test (ML = 1/22;TB = 0/20; p = 0.35) and retention test (ML pass/fail = 1/22, TB pass/fail = 0/20; p = 0.35). The ML course was slightly longer than the TB course (108[94;117] min vs. 95[89;102] min; p = 0.003).ConclusionsThere was no major benefit of a ML compared to a TB BLS course for the acquisition and four-month retention of knowledge or skills among laypeople.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…