• Cristina Cerezo Espinosa, Sergio Nieto Caballero, Laura Juguera Rodríguez, José Francisco Castejón-Mochón, Francisca Segura Melgarejo, Carmen María Sánchez Martínez, Carmen Amalia López López, and Manuel Pardo Ríos.
• Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), España. Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca de Murcia, España.
• Emergencias. 2018 Feb 1; 30 (1): 28-34.

ObjectivesTo compare secondary students' learning of basic life support (BLS) theory and the use of an automatic external defibrillator (AED) through face-to-face classroom instruction versus educational video instruction.Material And MethodsA total of 2225 secondary students from 15 schools were randomly assigned to one of the following 5 instructional groups: 1) face-to-face instruction with no audiovisual support, 2) face-to-face instruction with audiovisual support, 3) audiovisual instruction without face-to-face instruction, 4) audiovisual instruction with face-to-face instruction, and 5) a control group that received no instruction. The students took a test of BLS and AED theory before instruction, immediately after instruction, and 2 months later.ResultsThe median (interquartile range) scores overall were 2.33 (2.17) at baseline, 5.33 (4.66) immediately after instruction (P<.001) and 6.00 (3.33) (P<.001). All groups except the control group improved their scores. Scores immediately after instruction and 2 months later were statistically similar after all types of instruction.ConclusionNo significant differences between face-to-face instruction and audiovisual instruction for learning BLS and AED theory were found in secondary school students either immediately after instruction or 2 months later.

24 keywords...

hide…