Observational studyPeerJ2022
Initial implementation of the resuscitation quality improvement program in emergency department of a teaching hospital in China.
Observational study in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skills may decay over time after conventional instructor-led BLS training. The Resuscitation Quality Improvement® (RQI®) program, unlike a conventional basic life support (BLS) course, is implemented through mastery learning and low-dose, high-frequency training strategies to improve CPR competence. We facilitated the RQI program to compare the performance of novices Methods: A single-center observational study was conducted from May 9, 2021 to June 25, 2021 in an emergency department of a tertiary hospital. The performance assessment data of both trainees with a previous training experience in conventional BLS course (BLS group) and the novice ones with no prior experience with any BLS training (Non-BLS group) was collected by RQI cart and other outcome variables were rated by online questionnaire. Outcome measurements included chest compression and ventilation in both adult-sized and infant-sized manikins. Results: A total of 149 participants were enrolled. Among them, 103 participants were in BLS group and 46 participants in Non-BLS group. Post RQI training, all the trainees achieved a passing score of 75 or more, and obtained an improvement in CPR performance. The number of attempts to pass RQI for compression and ventilation practice was lower in the BLS group in both adult and infant training sessions ( Conclusion: Among novices, RQI can provide excellent CPR core skills performance. But for those who had previous BLS training experience, it was able to enhance the efficiency of the skills training with less time consumption. Most trainees obtained good confidence and satisfaction with RQI program, which might be an option for the broad prevalence of BLS training in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.