↓ Skip to main content

Does video feedback analysis improve CPR performance in phase 5 medical students?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
Title
Does video feedback analysis improve CPR performance in phase 5 medical students?
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0726-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew D. Spence, Sonia Derbyshire, Ian K. Walsh, James M. Murray

Abstract

The use of simulation in medical education is increasing, with students taught and assessed using simulated patients and manikins. Medical students at Queen's University of Belfast are taught advanced life support cardiopulmonary resuscitation as part of the undergraduate curriculum. Teaching and feedback in these skills have been developed in Queen's University with high-fidelity manikins. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of video compared to verbal feedback in assessment of student cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance. Final year students participated in this study using a high-fidelity manikin, in the Clinical Skills Centre, Queen's University Belfast. Cohort A received verbal feedback only on their performance and cohort B received video feedback only. Video analysis using 'StudioCode' software was distributed to students. Each group returned for a second scenario and evaluation 4 weeks later. An assessment tool was created for performance assessment, which included individual skill and global score evaluation. One hundred thirty eight final year medical students completed the study. 62 % were female and the mean age was 23.9 years. Students having video feedback had significantly greater improvement in overall scores compared to those receiving verbal feedback (p = 0.006, 95 % CI: 2.8-15.8). Individual skills, including ventilation quality and global score were significantly better with video feedback (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively) when compared with cohort A. There was a positive change in overall score for cohort B from session one to session two (p < 0.001, 95 % CI: 6.3-15.8) indicating video feedback significantly benefited skill retention. In addition, using video feedback showed a significant improvement in the global score (p < 0.001, 95 % CI: 3.3-7.2) and drug administration timing (p = 0.004, 95 % CI: 0.7-3.8) of cohort B participants, from session one to session two. There is increased use of simulation in medicine but a paucity of published data comparing feedback methods in cardiopulmonary resuscitation training. Our study shows the use of video feedback when teaching cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective than verbal feedback, and enhances skill retention. This is one of the first studies to demonstrate the benefit of video feedback in cardiopulmonary resuscitation teaching.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 12 10%
Other 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 5%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 33 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Psychology 4 3%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 34 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2016.
All research outputs
#18,471,305
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,755
of 3,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,881
of 355,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#65
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,338 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,887 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.