Training and Educational paperOptimal refresher training intervals for AED and CPR skills: A randomised controlled trial☆
Introduction
The use of AEDs by trained lay responders has been shown to achieve a reduction in the delay to defibrillation and thereby increase the proportion of victims who survive out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation. For example, security officers using AEDs in casinos in the USA have achieved an average time to first shock of 4.4 min, resulting in a survival to discharge rate of 53% for those patients with an initial rhythm of ventricular fibrillation.1 Moreover, the English Department of Health National Defibrillator Programme achieved a 25% survival after the first 250 AED deployments.2 Both studies report substantially higher survival than most traditional Emergency Medical Services, which rarely reach victims of collapse as quickly, with consequent poor outcomes. The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) has advocated the use of AEDs by ‘First Responders’, and the Department of Health in England has adopted this strategy as a core part of NHS service provision with AEDs used by lay volunteers who work at sites with ‘high risk’ of cardiac arrest.3, 4
AEDs in the ‘public access’ setting are likely to be used infrequently, with the result that deterioration in the responders’ skill levels may be a major problem,5 despite their simplicity of use. The most appropriate interval for refresher courses has not, however, been determined. The randomised controlled trial described in this paper compares performance after repeat refresher courses at seven or 12-month intervals in people given initial conventional training and one initial refresher class at 6 months.
Section snippets
Study design
This pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed to recruit all volunteer responders trained to use an AED in the Department of Health National Defibrillator Programme at Bristol International Airport who had taken part in a previous study and had agreed to undertake further refresher training.6
Sample size
A sample size calculation was performed prospectively. Previous research has reported a standard deviation of 34 s for the difference in time to first shock amongst lay trainees before and after
Data integrity
Twenty of the 77 subjects who had previously completed a first refresher class in the earlier study had either left their employment at the airport or declined to participate in the current trial. There were no significant differences between study participants and non-participants other than the greater proportion of males in the former group (74 versus 35%; 95% CI for difference −59 to −14%, P = 0.0017).
Thirty subjects were randomised to undertake a second refresher class at 7 months and a
Discussion
Frequency of retraining must be based on a balance between the need to maintain skills and the practicality of mandating refresher courses at frequent intervals. Providing refresher training at inappropriately long intervals may result in an unacceptable deterioration in skills between classes. However, providing training at short intervals may make volunteers less willing to attend, or their employers less willing to release them. This may result in an increased dropout rate from AED
Conclusion and recommendations
On completion of refresher training, all subjects maintained the ability to deliver countershocks; there was a clinically significant reduction in time to first shock of at least 17 s in both groups; and the proportion of subjects able to perform most skills increased. Further, refresher classes held more frequently and at shorter intervals seem to increase subject's self-assessed confidence – this may indicate increased likelihood of using an AED in a real emergency. Performance remains poor in
Conflict of interest statement
Douglas Chamberlain and Michael Colquhoun are members of the Department of Health (England) National Defibrillator Programme Advisory Committee. The trial reported in this paper was funded by the Department of Health, England.
Acknowledgements
The authors are particularly grateful to Siân Davies from the Department of Health, England, who provided significant practical and moral support, without which this study would not have been possible. We also gratefully acknowledge Jeremy Johnstone, David Morris, and Illtyd Hollard, all seconded from the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust as Research Assistants, for their help with the assessments and George Murphy for releasing his staff. We thank Symon Clifford and Ivor Valentine of the
References (17)
- et al.
The department of health national defibrillator programme: analysis of downloads from 250 deployments of public access defibrillators
Resuscitation
(2005) - et al.
Limitation on effectiveness of rapid defibrillation by emergency medical technicians in a rural setting
Ann Emerg Med
(1984) - et al.
Skill acquisition and retention in automated external defibrillator (AED) use and CPR by lay responders: a prospective study
Resuscitation
(2004) - et al.
Reliability of the cardiff test of basic life support and automated external defibrillation version 3.1
Resuscitation
(2003) - et al.
The problem of poor retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills may lie with the instructor, not the learner or the curriculum
Resuscitation
(1991) - et al.
A comparison of an innovative four-hour EMT-D course with a ‘standard’ ten-hour course
Ann Emerg Med
(1988) - et al.
Teaching adult resuscitation in the United States – time for a rethink
Resuscitation
(1998) - et al.
Retention of basic life support skills 6 months after training with an automated voice advisory manikin system without instructor involvement
Resuscitation
(2002)
Cited by (145)
Evaluation of Sudanese nurse's competence in automated external defibrillator (AED) knowledge and performance: Aquasi-experimental hospital base study in Khartoum locality
2024, International Journal of Africa Nursing SciencesRemediation practices for health profession students and clinicians: An integrative review
2023, Nurse Education TodayAvailability and use of external defibrillators in primary care practices
2024, Zeitschrift fur Allgemeinmedizin
- ☆
A Spanish translated version of the summary of this article appears as Appendix in the online version at 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2006.04.005.