ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We undertook this study to evaluate the educational benefits at each steps of expository cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training by immediate remediation for non-healthcare providers in our hospital. METHODS: The 150 office staffs who worked in our hospital participated in this study. Following an educational session consisting of a one-hour video tape and slides, we tested single-rescuer BLS performance (15 checklists) with Fullbody SkillReporter(TM) Resusci(R) Anne and Skillmeter Resusci(R) Anne according to 2005 AHA guidelines for CPR. Three tests and two remediations were given to each person, and data were collected after each trial. A statistical analysis was done using the SPSS statistical software package. A pvalue<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: Staff pass rates were improved in 13 checklists after remediation of CPR training. In the initial testing, the highest rate of pass was in assessment of responsiveness (0.89+/-0.31) and the lowest rate of pass was in the looking of in the checking-breathing test items (0.23+/-0.42). The highest rate of pass after two remediations was in the checking-breathing within 10 seconds (0.94+/-0.23) and the lowest rate of pass was in the rate of chest compression (0.52+/-0.50). The difference between males and females was in the rate of chest compression (p=0.001), but there is no difference of the educational benefits after two remediations by age-group. CONCLUSION: We found that the rate of passing in each steps of CPR training was improved by two remediations. Therefore, many iterations of remediation of CPR training for non-healthcare providers are necessary.
Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Male , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Checklist , ThoraxABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abdominal ultrasonography (USG) as performed by emergency physicians (EP) after systematic training and to compare it with the performance of a radiologist. METHODS: From 4 March, to 3 October, 2006, we enrolled 368 patients with suspected acute appendicitis and 177 patients with suspected acute cholecystitis. During night hours, abdominal USG was performed by EPs who had been trained for more than 2 years (Group I), and during day, it was performed by a radiologist (Group II). In group I, 201 patients were suspected to have acute appendicitis and 103 patients were suspected to have acute cholecystitis. In group II, 167 patients were suspected to have acute appendicitis and 74 patients were suspected to have acute cholecystitis. We reviewed pathology reports and the final diagnoses of all patients after one month. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy for each group and then compared the diagnostic accuracy for group I with that of group II using the chisquare test. RESULTS: With suspected acute appendicitis patients, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of USG were 92.0%, 85.2%, 88.9%, 89.3%, and 89.1% for group I and 94.2%, 85.7%, 91.6%, 90.0%, and 91.0% for group II. With suspected acute cholecystitis patients, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of USG were 87.2%, 93.8%, 89.5%, 92.3%, and 91.3% for group I and 92.0%, 93.9%, 88.5%, 95.8%, and 93.2% for group II. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic accuracy between the two groups. (p=0.533, p=0.630) CONCLUSION: In this study, there was no significant difference between EPs and a radiologist in diagnostic accuracy of abdominal USG. This result suggests that diagnostic abdominal USG for acute abdominal diseases, such as acute appendicitis and acute cholecystitis can be appropriately used as a diagnostic modality by emergency physicians who are properly trained in a systematic educational program.