The Library
Stepwise approach to skills teaching in resuscitation : a systematic review
Tools
Breckwoldt, Jan, Cheng, Adam, Lauridsen, Kasper G., Lockey, Andrew, Yeung, Joyce and Greif, Robert (2023) Stepwise approach to skills teaching in resuscitation : a systematic review. Resuscitation Plus, 16 . 100457. doi:10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100457 ISSN 2666-5204.
|
PDF
1-s2.0-S2666520423001005-main.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer. Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives 4.0. Download (329Kb) | Preview |
Official URL: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100457
Abstract
Aim
To compare the effectiveness of Peyton’s four-step approach for teaching resuscitation skills with alternative approaches.
Methods
For this systematic review, we followed the PICOST format (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, study design, timeframe) using Peyton’s four-step approach as the standard. We included all studies analyzing skills training related to resuscitation and First Aid in any educational setting. Eligible were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (non-randomized controlled trials, interrupted time series, controlled before-and-after studies, cohort studies, published conference abstracts, and case series where n ≥ 5). We excluded unpublished results (e.g. trial protocols), commentaries, editorials, reviews. Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from inception until November 10, 2020 (updated November 25, 2022) for publications in all languages as long as there was an English abstract. Titles and abstracts of the papers retrieved were screened, and eligible publications were analysed in full text. From the final set of papers, data were extracted into a spreadsheet, subsequently risk of bias assessment was performed (using RoB2 and ROBINS-I), and the certainty of evidence (using GRADE) for each paper was assessed. Screening of studies, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment, and assessment of certainty of evidence were all performed by two independent researchers. This review was conducted in adherence with PRISMA standards and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023377398).
Results
Overall, the search identified 2,574 studies from which 17 were included in the final analysis (14 RCTs, and 3 non-RCTs). The studies involved a total of 2,906 participants from various populations (from lay persons to health care professionals) and analysed nine different resuscitation skills being taught (ranging from chest compressions to needle cricotomy). The alternative teaching approaches ranged from two-steps to five-steps with various modifications of single steps. High methodological and clinical heterogeneity precluded a meta-analysis from being conducted. The risk of bias assessment showed considerable variation between the studies ranging from ‘low’ to ‘serious’. Across all studies, certainty of evidence was rated as very low due to imprecision and inconsistency. Overall, 14 out of 17 studies showed no difference in skill acquisition or retention when comparing Peyton’s four steps to other stepwise approaches.
Conclusions
Very low certainty evidence suggest that Peyton’s four-step approach was not more effective in resuscitation skills training compared to alternative approaches.
Item Type: | Journal Article | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Subjects: | R Medicine > R Medicine (General) R Medicine > RC Internal medicine |
||||||||
Divisions: | Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School | ||||||||
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): | Resuscitation -- Study and teaching, Medical education, Training | ||||||||
Journal or Publication Title: | Resuscitation Plus | ||||||||
Publisher: | Elsevier | ||||||||
ISSN: | 2666-5204 | ||||||||
Official Date: | December 2023 | ||||||||
Dates: |
|
||||||||
Volume: | 16 | ||||||||
Article Number: | 100457 | ||||||||
DOI: | 10.1016/j.resplu.2023.100457 | ||||||||
Status: | Peer Reviewed | ||||||||
Publication Status: | Published | ||||||||
Access rights to Published version: | Open Access (Creative Commons) | ||||||||
Date of first compliant deposit: | 30 August 2023 | ||||||||
Date of first compliant Open Access: | 30 August 2023 |
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
View Item |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year