ArticleCureus2023
Learner's Stop the Bleed Outcomes Between Lay Instructor and Emergency Medical Services (EMS)-Trained Instructor Groups.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne of the most utilized Stop the Bleed courses, the "Bleeding Control Basic (BCon) course v. 1.0," requires instructors to have a specific healthcare license or pre-hospital credential (e.g., physician or paramedic) or specific emergency medical services (EMS) instructor certification and have completed the BCon provider course. This requirement provides a level of expertise in instructors but limits the potential workforce for sharing life-saving knowledge and skills. Other Stop the Bleed courses, such as the American Red Cross First Aid for Severe Trauma (FAST) course, do not have this requirement. This raises questions pertaining to the learners' outcomes between those facilitated by instructors with and without healthcare licenses or credentials.
methodsLearners' outcomes for applying a tourniquet (skill), knowledge (cognitive), and Intention to Aid (attitude for behavior) were compared between those taught by lay instructors and EMS-trained (emergency medical technician or paramedic) instructors. All were trained as new instructors in the FAST program.
resultsFor the study's primary outcome, all of the learners (n=135) properly applied a tourniquet to a simulated leg injury at the end of the training based on video evidence (skill). Learners in the EMS-trained instructor groups (n=84, mean age 25.5 years, 68% female), who were older and had more education, scored significantly higher on knowledge of tourniquet use on the Stop the Bleed Educational Assessment Tool (SBEAT) (mean=90.0 vs. 83.9 on a scale of 0-100, p=0.001) with a small effect size than the lay instructor group (n=51, mean age 16.6 years, 88% female). There was no statistical difference in attitude toward helping behaviors in a bleeding emergency between the two groups on the Intention to Aid (I2A) survey. IMPLICATIONS: Lay instructors and EMS-trained instructors performed comparably in facilitating a widely available Red Cross Stop the Bleed course. Lay experience with tourniquets should not disqualify individuals from being a Stop the Bleed instructor. Using a standard curriculum with instructor development offers a way for people with and without an EMS background to teach life-saving competencies effectively.
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.