To investigate the effectiveness of brief bedside "booster" cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training to improve CPR guideline compliance of hospital-based pediatric providers.
Prospective, ...randomized trial.
General pediatric wards at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.
Sixty-nine Basic Life Support-certified hospital-based providers.
CPR recording/feedback defibrillators were used to evaluate CPR quality during simulated pediatric arrest. After a 60-sec pretraining CPR evaluation, subjects were randomly assigned to one of three instructional/feedback methods to be used during CPR booster training sessions. All sessions (training/CPR manikin practice) were of equal duration (2 mins) and differed only in the method of corrective feedback given to participants during the session. The study arms were as follows: 1) instructor-only training; 2) automated defibrillator feedback only; and 3) instructor training combined with automated feedback.
Before instruction, 57% of the care providers performed compressions within guideline rate recommendations (rate >90 min(-1) and <120 min(-1)); 71% met minimum depth targets (depth, >38 mm); and 36% met overall CPR compliance (rate and depth within targets). After instruction, guideline compliance improved (instructor-only training: rate 52% to 87% p .01, and overall CPR compliance, 43% to 78% p < .02; automated feedback only: rate, 70% to 96% p = .02, depth, 61% to 100% p < .01, and overall CPR compliance, 35% to 96% p < .01; and instructor training combined with automated feedback: rate 48% to 100% p < .01, depth, 78% to 100% p < .02, and overall CPR compliance, 30% to 100% p < .01).
Before booster CPR instruction, most certified Pediatric Basic Life Support providers did not perform guideline-compliant CPR. After a brief bedside training, CPR quality improved irrespective of training content (instructor vs. automated feedback). Future studies should investigate bedside training to improve CPR quality during actual pediatric cardiac arrests.
The COVID-19 pandemic required schools to transition courses to an online platform. This shift to Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) created gaps in the literature about its impact on students.
The ...purpose of this study was to test the relationship between learner and instructional attributes and learner satisfaction with ERT.
A modified version of the Student Satisfaction Survey assessed learner and instructional attributes and learner satisfaction among a convenience sample of 12 graduate and 83 undergraduate nursing students. Open-ended questions assessed students’ responses to their satisfaction with ERT. Multiple regression analysis was used to test associations of learner and instructional attributes with student satisfaction.
Overall satisfaction with ERT was neutral with a mean of 2.76 on a 1 to 5 scale; students rated instructional attributes higher with a mean of 3.64. Instructional engagement/technology use (single factor) and learner technology competence were associated with student satisfaction, beta = 0.93(0.09), p<.001; beta = 0.24(0.09), p = .008, respectively. Between-class technology use and prior experience with online courses were not associated with student satisfaction, beta = -0.08(0.09), p = .379, beta = 0.26(0.15), p = .079, respectively. Qualitative findings revealed faculty engagement was a major determinant in learner satisfaction with ERT.
Supporting faculty competence for the use of technology may increase learner satisfaction with ERT.
PDF
