首页> 外文期刊>Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine >Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training strategies in the times of COVID-19: a systematic literature review comparing different training methodologies
【24h】

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training strategies in the times of COVID-19: a systematic literature review comparing different training methodologies

机译:Covid-19时代的心肺复苏(CPR)培训策略:一个系统文献综述比较不同的培训方法

获取原文

摘要

Traditional, instructor led, in-person training of CPR skills has become more challenging due to COVID-19 pandemic. We compared the learning outcomes of standard in-person CPR training (ST) with alternative methods of training such as hybrid or online-only training (AT) on CPR performance, quality, and knowledge among laypersons with no previous CPR training. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for relevant articles from January 1995 to May 2020. Covidence was used to review articles by two independent researchers. Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool was used to assess quality of the manuscripts. Of the 978 articles screened, twenty met the final inclusion criteria. All included studies had an experimental design and moderate to strong global quality rating. The trainees in ST group performed better on calling 911, time to initiate chest compressions, hand placement and chest compression depth. Trainees in AT group performed better in assessing scene safety, calling for help, response time including initiating first rescue breathing, adequate ventilation volume, compression rates, shorter hands-off time, confidence, willingness to perform CPR, ability to follow CPR algorithm, and equivalent or better knowledge retention than standard teaching methodology. AT methods of CPR training provide an effective alternative to the standard in-person CPR for large scale public training.
机译:传统的教师LED,对CPR技能的培训培训由于Covid-19大流行而变得更具挑战性。我们将标准人员CPR培训(ST)的学习结果与替代方法进行了比较,例如唯一的CPR绩效,质量和在未经先前的CPR培训中的CPR绩效,质量和知识的混合或在线培训(AT)。我们在1995年1月到2020年5月搜索了有关文章的PubMed和Google学者。Covend被用来审查两个独立研究人员的文章。有效的公共卫生实践项目(EPHPP)质量评估工具用于评估稿件的质量。在筛选的978篇文章中,二十满足了最终的纳入标准。所有包括的研究都有一个实验设计和中度至强大的全球质量评级。 ST组中的学员在呼叫911时表现更好,时间启动胸部按压,手部放置和胸部压缩深度。小组的受训人员在评估场景安全方面表现更好,呼吁帮助,响应时间,包括启动首次救援呼吸,充足的通风量,压缩率,较短的offer-关闭时间,信心,执行CPR的愿意,遵循CPR算法,能够遵循CPR算法,以及相当于或更好的知识保留而不是标准教学方法。在CPR培训的方法中,为大规模公共培训提供了标准的CPR的有效替代方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号