e-Learning in Advanced Life Support—What factors influence assessment outcome?

• Published in: Resuscitation 2017-05, Vol.114, p.83-91
• Main Authors: Thorne, C.J, Lockey, A.S, Kimani, P.K, Bullock, I, Hampshire, S, Begum-Ali, S, Perkins, G.D
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Advanced Cardiac Life Support - education; Advanced Life Support; ALS; Assessment; Clinical Competence; Computer-Assisted Instruction - methods; e-Learning; Education; Educational Measurement; Emergency; Humans; Outcome Assessment (Health Care); Program Evaluation; Surveys and Questionnaires
• ISSN: 0300-9572; 1873-1570
• DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.02.014

Abstract Aim To establish variables which are associated with favourable Advanced Life Support (ALS) course assessment outcomes, maximising learning effect. Method Between 1 January 2013 and 30 June 2014, 8218 individuals participated in a Resuscitation Council (UK) e-learning Advanced Life Support (e-ALS) course. Participants completed 5–8 h of online e-learning prior to attending a one day face-to-face course. e-Learning access data were collected through the Learning Management System (LMS). All participants were assessed by a multiple choice questionnaire (MCQ) before and after the face-to-face aspect alongside a practical cardiac arrest simulation (CAS-Test). Participant demographics and assessment outcomes were analysed. Results The mean post e-learning MCQ score was 83.7 (SD 7.3) and the mean post-course MCQ score was 87.7 (SD 7.9). The first attempt CAS-Test pass rate was 84.6% and overall pass rate 96.6%. Participants with previous ALS experience, ILS experience, or who were a core member of the resuscitation team performed better in the post-course MCQ, CAS-Test and overall assessment. Median time spent on the e-learning was 5.2 h (IQR 3.7–7.1). There was a large range in the degree of access to e-learning content. Increased time spent accessing e-learning had no effect on the overall result (OR 0.98, P = 0.367) on simulated learning outcome. Conclusion Clinical experience through core membership of cardiac arrest teams and previous ILS or ALS training were independent predictors of performance on the ALS course whilst time spent accessing e-learning materials did not affect course outcomes. This supports the blended approach to e-ALS which allows participants to tailor their e-learning experience to their specific needs.