Teaching the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to Paramedics (E-Learning vs Video): Randomized Controlled Trial.
active learning
e-learning
electronic learning
online learning
stroke
video
Journal
Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 06 2020
09 06 2020
Historique:
received:
21
02
2020
accepted:
16
04
2020
revised:
01
04
2020
pubmed:
18
4
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
entrez:
18
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Prompt and accurate identification of stroke victims is essential to reduce time from symptom onset to adequate treatment and to improve neurological outcomes. Most neurologists evaluate the extent of neurological deficit according to the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), but the use of this scale by paramedics, the first healthcare providers to usually take care of stroke victims, has proven unreliable. This might be, at least in part, due to the teaching method. The video used to teach NIHSS lacks interactivity, while more engaging electronic learning (e-learning) methods might improve knowledge acquisition. This study was designed to evaluate whether a highly interactive e-learning module could enhance NIHSS knowledge acquisition in paramedics. A randomized controlled trial comparing a specially designed e-learning module with the original NIHSS video was performed with paramedics working in Geneva, Switzerland. A registration number was not required as our study does not come into the scope of the Swiss federal law on human research. The protocol was nevertheless submitted to the local ethics committee (Project ID 2017-00847), which issued a "Declaration of no objection." Paramedics were excluded if they had prior knowledge of or previous training in the NIHSS, or if they had worked in a neurology or neurosurgery ward. The primary outcome was overall performance in the study quiz, which contained 50 questions. Secondary outcomes were performance by NIHSS item, time to course and quiz completion, user satisfaction regarding the learning method, user perception of the course duration, and probability the user would recommend the course to a colleague. The study was completed by 39 paramedics. There was a better overall median score (36/50 vs 33/50, P=.04) and a higher degree of satisfaction regarding the learning method in the e-learning group (90% vs 37%, P=.002). Users who had followed the e-learning module were more likely to recommend the course to a colleague (95% vs 63%, P=.02). Paramedics in the e-learning group took more time to complete the course (93 vs 59 minutes, P<.001), but considered the duration to be more adequate (75% vs 32%, P=.01). Time to quiz completion was similar between groups (25 vs 38 minutes, P=.12). Use of an e-learning module shows promising results in teaching the NIHSS to paramedics.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Prompt and accurate identification of stroke victims is essential to reduce time from symptom onset to adequate treatment and to improve neurological outcomes. Most neurologists evaluate the extent of neurological deficit according to the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), but the use of this scale by paramedics, the first healthcare providers to usually take care of stroke victims, has proven unreliable. This might be, at least in part, due to the teaching method. The video used to teach NIHSS lacks interactivity, while more engaging electronic learning (e-learning) methods might improve knowledge acquisition.
OBJECTIVE
This study was designed to evaluate whether a highly interactive e-learning module could enhance NIHSS knowledge acquisition in paramedics.
METHODS
A randomized controlled trial comparing a specially designed e-learning module with the original NIHSS video was performed with paramedics working in Geneva, Switzerland. A registration number was not required as our study does not come into the scope of the Swiss federal law on human research. The protocol was nevertheless submitted to the local ethics committee (Project ID 2017-00847), which issued a "Declaration of no objection." Paramedics were excluded if they had prior knowledge of or previous training in the NIHSS, or if they had worked in a neurology or neurosurgery ward. The primary outcome was overall performance in the study quiz, which contained 50 questions. Secondary outcomes were performance by NIHSS item, time to course and quiz completion, user satisfaction regarding the learning method, user perception of the course duration, and probability the user would recommend the course to a colleague.
RESULTS
The study was completed by 39 paramedics. There was a better overall median score (36/50 vs 33/50, P=.04) and a higher degree of satisfaction regarding the learning method in the e-learning group (90% vs 37%, P=.002). Users who had followed the e-learning module were more likely to recommend the course to a colleague (95% vs 63%, P=.02). Paramedics in the e-learning group took more time to complete the course (93 vs 59 minutes, P<.001), but considered the duration to be more adequate (75% vs 32%, P=.01). Time to quiz completion was similar between groups (25 vs 38 minutes, P=.12).
CONCLUSIONS
Use of an e-learning module shows promising results in teaching the NIHSS to paramedics.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32299792
pii: v22i6e18358
doi: 10.2196/18358
pmc: PMC7312264
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e18358Informations de copyright
©Avinash Koka, Laurent Suppan, Philippe Cottet, Emmanuel Carrera, Loric Stuby, Mélanie Suppan. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 09.06.2020.
Références
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2004 Jan-Mar;8(1):46-50
pubmed: 14691787
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Oct 2;21(10):e15118
pubmed: 31579016
Int J Stroke. 2009 Aug;4(4):267-73
pubmed: 19689755
J Contin Educ Nurs. 2015 Jul;46(7):292-4
pubmed: 26154667
Nurse Educ Today. 2017 Oct;57:60-64
pubmed: 28734188
Stroke. 1994 Nov;25(11):2220-6
pubmed: 7974549
Arch Neurol. 1989 Jun;46(6):660-2
pubmed: 2730378
Brain Behav. 2018 Sep;8(9):e01087
pubmed: 30085409
Ann Emerg Med. 1999 Apr;33(4):373-8
pubmed: 10092713
Stroke. 2017 Feb;48(2):513-519
pubmed: 28077454
Stroke. 2018 Mar;49(3):e46-e110
pubmed: 29367334
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2011;31(1):51-6
pubmed: 20980754
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 9;7(1):e014024
pubmed: 28069626
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 21;1:CD011736
pubmed: 29355907
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Mar 02;14:41
pubmed: 24580830
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Sep 13;14(5):e121
pubmed: 23195753
J Neurol. 2017 Jan;264(1):131-138
pubmed: 27822599
Semin Neurol. 2018 Apr;38(2):208-211
pubmed: 29791947
Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Dec;46(12):1548-56
pubmed: 19552905
Korean J Intern Med. 2018 May;33(3):604-611
pubmed: 28724281
Stroke. 2015 Feb;46(2):575-8
pubmed: 25538202
J Clin Med. 2020 Jan 16;9(1):
pubmed: 31963162
Nurse Educ Today. 2018 Feb;61:249-257
pubmed: 29272824
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Dec 31;13(4):e126
pubmed: 22209829
J Orthop. 2016 Sep 21;13(4):425-30
pubmed: 27688638
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jun 10;111(23):8410-5
pubmed: 24821756
Emerg Med J. 2010 Feb;27(2):100-4
pubmed: 20156859
Neuroepidemiology. 2018;51(3-4):123-127
pubmed: 30092562
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2013 Aug;10(3):174-83
pubmed: 23510119