Does age still matter? An age-group comparison of self-efficacy, initial interest and performance when learning bystander resuscitation in secondary schools

Rico Dumcke, Niels Rahe-Meyer, Claas Wegner
2021 International Journal of First Aid Education  
Besides first aid courses, the introduction and implementation of basic life support (BLS) educational approaches in secondary schools has been highly recommended in the past few years Cave et al., 2011) . These public health initiatives aim to achieve a substantial contribution to the improvement of general bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) rates and reduce the anxiety and inhibitions of teenagers to begin CPR . Background: CPR training is recommended for secondary school students
more » ... ry school students in many countries to improve bystander resuscitation and survival rates after cardiac arrest. The recommended age for implementing first aid interventions varies between studies. Methods: This study aims to examine psychological (self-efficacy, interest; primary endpoint) and physical (compression depth, rate and chest recoil) outcomes (secondary endpoint) in different age groups after a CPR intervention. A sample of 552 secondary school students from five different schools in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, was assigned to face-to-face CPR lessons held by student teachers. Participants were separated into two age groups (11-13 and 14-17 years), according to recommendations and previous evidence about appropriate training age. Time-and between-groupeffects were analyzed using t-tests between baseline and the final testing point. Results: A total of 365 questionnaires and 189 manikin recordings formed the complete dataset. No differences were found between age groups for self-efficacy, outcome expectancies and interest (p > 0.05). In both groups, self-efficacy and positive outcome expectancies improved, but negative expectancies as well as the students' interest did not. After the intervention, only the older students achieved a higher accuracy (80% vs. 60%; p < 0.05) and mean depth (62.6 vs. 53.9 mm; p < 0.05) in chest compressions but exceeding the 50-60 mm guideline. For rate and chest recoil, no significant differences were found (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Regardless of age, all students benefit from this intervention regarding an improvement in self-efficacy and chest compressions. Negative consequences and inadequate compression rates are relatively stable within this age range and should be clearly addressed in lessons.
doi:10.21038/ijfa.2021.0411 fatcat:p7nenahbkjf6vfimivtgscbr6u