Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33154684›Full record

ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2020

Comparison of Repeated Video Display vs Combined Video Display and Live Demonstration as Training Methods to Healthcare Providers for Donning and Doffing Personal Protective Equipment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Yongxing Li, Yong Wang, Yuhui Li, Ming Zhong, Huihui Liu, Caineng Wu, Xiaoqiu Gao, Zhengyuan Xia, Wuhua Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Yongxing Li *Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yong Wang *Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yuhui LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Ming ZhongDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Huihui LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Caineng WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xiaoqiu GaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Zhengyuan XiaDepartment of Anesthesiology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China.
Wuhua MaDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe lack of training in personal protective equipment (PPE) donning and doffing is hindering the current fight against the COVID-19 worldwide. In order to enable medical staff to learn how to don and doff PPE faster and more effectively, we compared two training methods of PPE donning and doffing.

methodsParticipants in this study were 48 health care workers randomly divided into two groups. Group A watched a 10-minute demonstration (demo) video four times, while Group B watched the same 10-minute demo video twice and then watched a 10-minute live demo twice. The 40-minute learning time was the same for both groups. A 29-step examination was held after the training was completed. The examination scores of Groups A and B were recorded according to a checklist containing PPE donning and doffing steps . The time spent by the participants on PPE donning and doffing, their satisfaction with the training, and their confidence in donning and doffing PPE accurately were analyzed.

resultsThe average score of Group B was higher than that Group A, with a mean (SD) of 94.92 (1.72) vs 86.63 (6.34), respectively (P<0.001). The average time spent by Group B was shorter than that spent by Group A, with a mean (SD) of 17.67 (1.01) vs 21.75 (1.82), respectively (P<0.001). The satisfaction and confidence of Group B were higher than those of Group A (P<0.001).

conclusionCompared with repeated video display, combined video display and live demonstration are more suitable training methods for donning and doffing PPE.

Indexed as

coronavirus diseaseCOVID-19personal protective equipmenttraining methods

Identifiers

PMID33154684
PMCPMC7605971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.