Comparing Learning Outcomes in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and/or Automated External Defibrillator (AED) Training for Laypeople in Face-to-Face, Online, and Mixed Training Methods: An Integrative Literature Review

Cardiovascular diseases and cardiac arrest (CA) are the main causes of death worldwide. This review aims to identify publications on the learning outcomes for the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) and/or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to train laypeople (LP), the method of traini...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2023-05, Vol.15 (5), p.e38489-e38489
Main Authors: Gino, Bruno, Siraj, Samyah, Peixoto, Maria, Benson, Andy, Dubrowski, Adam
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aircraft
Audiences
Automation
Cardiac arrest
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation
CPR
Drones
Educational objectives
Emergency Medicine
First aid
Hospitals
Literature reviews
Medical Education
Medical personnel
Medical Simulation
Medical supplies
Online instruction
Simulation
Training
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Cardiovascular diseases and cardiac arrest (CA) are the main causes of death worldwide. This review aims to identify publications on the learning outcomes for the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) and/or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to train laypeople (LP), the method of training used, the year of publication and their recommendations. We employed Miller's assessment pyramid to describe learning outcomes as knowledge, skills, and confidence. The methods of training are face-to-face, online, and mixed. The evidence found in this study will be used to support the development and validation of a simulation-based training program to teach LP to operate AEDs delivered by drones in rural and remote (R&R) locations. This article is an integrative literature review with a quantitative and qualitative research design and is composed of seven steps: research question, inclusion and exclusion criteria, search and selection of studies, the role of a second reviewer of the findings, data analysis, interpretation and discussion of the results, and finally knowledge synthesis. The results of this review demonstrate that there are no significant differences in the learning outcomes of the different training methods. Since these findings suggest good results in all methods, the development of a training program based on face-to-face, online, and mixed, especially for places with few resources such as R&R places, indicates all methods can be used as good practices to develop training programs.
ISSN:2168-8184
2168-8184
DOI:10.7759/cureus.38489