Comparing methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation instruction on learning and retention.
This article describes a study of two methods of teaching CPR where immediate and long-term retention of CPR skills and knowledge were compared. Forty-nine subjects were randomly assigned to either a control group (didactic instruction) or an experimental group (modular instruction). Knowledge retention was evaluated by means of a written examination. Skills retention was evaluated by the Mandel observation instrument. The knowledge and skills performance of both groups, immediately following the class and at 3 months follow up, were not significantly different. Based on these results, modular instruction appears to be an effective alternative to the conventional time-consuming and expensive method commonly used for CPR instruction.
Coleman
S
S
Dracup
K
K
Moser
D K
DK
D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007318:Inservice Training / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D008297:Male; D009741:Nursing Staff, Hospital / Q000193:education*; D015397:Program Evaluation; D011380:Programmed Instructions as Topic / Q000592:standards; D012151:Resuscitation; D013663:Teaching / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards