Data from: Comparison of a newly established emotional stimulus approach to a classical assessment-driven approach in BLS Training - a randomized controlled trial

Objective: The study objective was to implement two strategies (short emotional stimulus vs. announced practical assessment) in the teaching of resuscitation skills in order to evaluate whether one led to superior outcomes. Setting: This study is an educational intervention provided in one German academic university hospital. Participants: First year Medical students (n=271) during the first 3 weeks of their studies. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups following a sequence of random numbers: the emotional stimulus group (EG) and the assessment group (AG). In the EG, the intervention included watching an emotionally stimulating video prior to the BLS-course. In the AG, a practical assessment of the BLS algorithm was announced and tested within a 2min simulated cardiac arrest scenario. After the baseline testing, a standardized BLS-course was provided. Evaluation points were defined one week and six months after. Primary outcome measures: Compression depth (CD) and compression rate (CR) were recorded as the primary endpoints for BLS quality. Results: Within the study 137 participants were allocated to the EG and 134 to the AG. 104 participants from EG and 120 were analysed 1 week after the intervention where they reached comparable chest-compressions performance without significant differences (CR p=0.49; CD p=0.28). The chest-compression performance improved significantly for EG (p<0.01) and the AG (p<0.01) while adhering to the current Resuscitation guidelines criteria for CD and CR. Conclusions: There was no statistical difference between both groups’ practical chest-compression-performance. Nevertheless, the two-minute video sequence used in the EG with its low production effort and costs, compared with the expensive assessment approach, provides broad opportunities for applicability in BLS-training. Trial registration: The trial was registered and approved by the local ethics committee EK 249/12

研究目标：本研究旨在复苏技能教学中实施两种干预策略（简短情感刺激组 vs. 预先告知实操考核组），以评估二者是否可带来更优异的教学效果。
研究场景：本研究为一项教育干预研究，开展于德国一所学术型大学附属医院。
研究对象：医学专业一年级、处于入学前3周的医学生（n=271）。
干预措施：研究对象通过随机数字序列被随机分配至两个组别：情感刺激组（Emotional Stimulus Group, EG）与考核组（Assessment Group, AG）。情感刺激组的干预内容为：在基础生命支持(Basic Life Support, BLS)课程开始前，观看一段具有情感刺激性的视频；考核组则预先被告知将开展基础生命支持算法实操考核，并在2分钟模拟心脏骤停场景中完成该项考核。基线测试完成后，所有受试者均接受标准化基础生命支持课程。评估节点设置为干预后1周及6个月。
主要结局指标：以胸外按压深度(Compression Depth, CD)与按压频率(Compression Rate, CR)作为基础生命支持质量评价的主要终点指标。
研究结果：本研究共纳入137名受试者至情感刺激组，134名至考核组。干预后1周，情感刺激组中104名受试者、考核组中120名受试者完成数据分析，两组胸外按压表现无显著统计学差异（按压频率p=0.49；按压深度p=0.28）。两组受试者的胸外按压表现均较基线水平显著提升（情感刺激组p<0.01，考核组p<0.01），且所得结果符合当前复苏指南中关于按压深度与频率的标准要求。
研究结论：两组受试者的实操胸外按压表现无统计学差异。相较于成本高昂的实操考核方案，情感刺激组所使用的制作成本低廉、耗时仅2分钟的视频序列，在基础生命支持培训中具备更广泛的应用前景。
试验注册：本试验已完成注册，并经当地伦理委员会批准（批准号：EK 249/12）