Evaluating CPR training: simulation vs. webinars for Iranian emergency medical technicians during COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The high prevalence of COVID-19 and the necessity for social distancing have impacted medical training. On the one hand, the high mortality rate following the disease led the American Heart Association (AHA) to issue guidelines in October 2020 for performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation on patients diagnosed or suspected of having COVID-19. Various methods exist for teaching these guidelines. However, the use of many of these methods is greatly challenged due to the high risk of disease transmission. Moreover, the published guidelines emphasize protection against COVID-19 infection. The present study aims to compare the impact of two educational methods, educational webinars and simulations, on the competence of performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the COVID-19 epidemic.

METHODS: This semi-experimental study was conducted on 70 emergency medical technicians. A pre-test was administered to all participants, and then they were randomly assigned into two groups: an educational webinar group (35 people) and a simulation group (35 people). The educational webinar group received online training using Adobe Connect software version 2.6.9, while the simulation group received in-person training using a manikin simulator. The competence of performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the COVID-19 epidemic was compared between the two groups immediately after the training and again two months later. Data collection instruments utilized in this research included a demographic questionnaire and a competency questionnaire in performing CPR during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data were analyzed using SPSS software version 19 and statistical tests for comparison.

RESULTS: The results indicated that in both the educational webinar and simulation groups, the average competence score for performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) at the three stages under investigation showed significant differences (p < 0.001). Additionally, in both groups under study, the average competence score for performing CPR immediately and two months after training was significantly higher compared to before the training (p < 0.001); however, two months after training, it was significantly lower compared to immediately after the training (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results obtained from the current research, both educational methods (educational webinar and simulation) had a significant effect on the competence of performing CPR during the COVID-19 epidemic and were equally effective. Moreover, the recall test results (two months later) showed a decrease in the competence of performing CPR during the COVID-19 epidemic in both training methods (webinar and simulation), indicating the need for periodic CPR training.