Comparing methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation instruction on learning and retention

J Nurs Staff Dev. 1991 Mar-Apr;7(2):82-7.

Abstract

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.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Inservice Training / methods*
  • Inservice Training / standards
  • Male
  • Nursing Staff, Hospital / education*
  • Program Evaluation
  • Programmed Instructions as Topic* / standards
  • Resuscitation*
  • Teaching / methods*
  • Teaching / standards