By using the LC-CUSUM test, we were able to quantitatively monitor the acquisition of the skill of ETI by EM residents. The LC-CUSUM could be useful for monitoring the learning process for the training of airway management in the practice of EM.
BackgroundStudents are largely providing feedback to one another when instructor facilitates peer feedback rather than teaching in group training. The number of students in a group affect the learning of students in the group training. We aimed to investigate whether a larger group size increases students’ test scores on a post-training test with peer feedback facilitated by instructor after video-guided basic life support (BLS) refresher training. Students’ one-rescuer adult BLS skills were assessed by a 2-min checklist-based test 1 year after the initial training.MethodsA cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of student number in a group on BLS refresher training. Participants included 115 final-year medical students undergoing their emergency medicine clerkship. The median number of students was 8 in the large groups and 4 in the standard group. The primary outcome was to examine group differences in post-training test scores after video-guided BLS training. Secondary outcomes included the feedback time, number of feedback topics, and results of end-of-training evaluation questionnaires.ResultsScores on the post-training test increased over three consecutive tests with instructor-led peer feedback, but not differ between large and standard groups. The feedback time was longer and number of feedback topics generated by students were higher in standard groups compared to large groups on the first and second tests. The end-of-training questionnaire revealed that the students in large groups preferred the smaller group size compared to their actual group size.ConclusionsIn this BLS refresher training, the instructor-led group feedback increased the test score after tutorial video-guided BLS learning, irrespective of the group size. A smaller group size allowed more participations in peer feedback.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0682-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
is pleased to release the most current nationally representative data on ambulatory care visits to hospital emergency departments (ED) in the United States. Statistics are presented on selected hospital, patient, and visit characteristics based on data collected in the 2011 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS). NHAMCS is an annual nationally representative sample survey of visits to EDs, outpatient departments, and ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) of nonfederal short-stay and general hospitals (starting in 2009), as well as freestanding ASCs (starting in 2010). The sampling frame for the 2011 NHAMCS was constructed from SDI's "Healthcare Market Index, Updated July 15, 2006" and "Hospital Market Profiling Solution, Second Quarter, 2006." NHAMCS uses a multi-stage probability design with samples of primary sampling units (PSUs), hospitals within PSUs, and patient visits within emergency service areas (ESAs). A total of 483 hospitals were selected for the 2011 NHAMCS, of which 370 were in scope and had eligible EDs. Of these, 322 participated, yielding an unweighted ED response rate of 87.0 percent. All 419 emergency services areas (ESAs) were selected from the EDs. Of these, 387 responded fully or adequately by providing forms for at least half of their expected visits based on the total number of visits during the reporting period, and 5 responded minimally (i.e., they provided fewer than half of their expected forms). In all, 31,084 Patient Record forms (PRFs) were submitted. The resulting unweighted ESA sample response rate was 92.4 percent, and the overall unweighted two stage sampling response rate was 80.4 percent (81.3% weighted). Response rates have been adjusted to exclude minimal participants.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.