Back to all available

The contribution of smartphone applications to ACLS training of emergency medicine residents: A randomized controlled study

clinical-trials
emergency-and-critical-care
health-policy
science-and-medical-education

Abstract

Introduction: Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) training is a cornerstone of emergency medicine residency programs. Timely and effective application of ACLS protocols can be lifesaving. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of simulation-based smartphone applications in enhancing ACLS practice compared to traditional educational methods.

Materials and Methods: This randomized, controlled, cross-sectional study included volunteer emergency medicine residents working in the emergency department of a tertiary education and research hospital, all of whom had previously completed standard ACLS training at least once. Following randomization, participants were assigned to one of two groups. The Standard Training (STD) group comprised emergency department (ED) residents who received traditional ACLS instruction without the use of smartphone applications. The Simulation (SIM) group included ED residents who were trained using a selected smartphone-based simulation application.

Results: A total of 34 participants were enrolled, with 17 residents in each group. Based on evaluations across 12 clinical scenarios, the mean case score for the STD group was 79.23 ± 7.63, while the SIM group achieved a significantly higher mean score of 89.95 ± 5.26 (t = 4.66, p < 0.001). In the ECG rhythm recognition assessment, the STD group had an average score of 72.06 ± 7.08, compared to 82.06 ± 6.14 in the SIM group, indicating a notable improvement in diagnostic accuracy among those trained with the simulation app.

Conclusion: The findings clearly demonstrate that simulation-based ACLS training utilizing smartphone applications is more effective than conventional training methods in improving both case performance and ECG rhythm recognition.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].