Recertification in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A comparison of two teaching methods

In this study, the authors compare knowledge scores, pass/fail rate, time spent, satisfaction, and skill retention between two teaching methods used in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) recertification. Seventy subjects were assigned randomly to either traditional or computer method of instruction. Knowledge was evaluated by written examination. Psychomotor skills were evaluated either by a Basic Cardiac Life Support certified instructor (control group) or the computer (experimental group) and reevaluated by an instructor at a 6-month interval. There was no significant difference between the groups in knowledge or performance scores. However, significant differences in time spent, learner satisfaction, and pass/fail rate all favored the traditional method of instruction. These findings conflict with the results of prior studies on the use of the computer interactive learning system.