Resuscitation
Volume 81, Issue 4 , Pages 453-456, April 2010

Written evaluation is not a predictor for skills performance in an Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support course☆

  • David L. Rodgers

      Affiliations

    • Center for Simulation, Advanced Education, and Innovation, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Center for Simulation, Advanced Education, and Innovation, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 8NW100, 34th Street and Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Tel.: +1 267 426 4956; fax: +1 215 590 2969.
    • ,
  • Farhan Bhanji

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pediatrics and Centre for Medical Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 2T5, Canada
    • ,
  • Barbara R. McKee

      Affiliations

    • Charleston Area Medical Center Health Education and Research Institute, Charleston, WV 25304, USA

Received 7 August 2009; received in revised form 10 November 2009; accepted 14 December 2009. published online 01 February 2010.

Abstract 

Objective

Both a written cognitive knowledge evaluation and a practical evaluation that tests psychomotor skills, cognitive knowledge, and affective behaviors such as leadership and team skills are required for successful completion of American Heart Association (AHA) Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) course. The 2005 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Consensus on Science and Treatment Recommendations noted that in Basic Life Support (BLS) there is little to no correlation between written and practical skills. The current study was conducted to determine if there is a correlation between written and practical evaluations in an ACLS course.

Methods

34 senior nursing students from four nursing programs participated in two separate ACLS classes, completing both the written and practical evaluations. Immediately following the courses, all participants served as team leader for a video recorded simulated cardiac arrest event. A panel of expert ACLS instructors who did not participate as instructors in the courses reviewed each video and independently scored team leaders’ performances.

Results

Spearman's rho correlation coefficient between the written test scores and practical skills performance was 0.194 (2-tailed significance=0.272).

Conclusion

The ACLS written evaluation was not a predictor of participant skills in managing a simulated cardiac arrest event immediately following an ACLS course. The single case simulations used in ACLS skills evaluation test a narrow portion of ACLS content while written evaluation tests can more practically test a broader spectrum of content. Both work in concert to define participant knowledge and neither should be used exclusively to determine participant competence.

Keywords: Education, Evaluation, Simulation, Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

☆ A Spanish translated version of the abstract of this article appears as Appendix in the final online version at doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.12.018.

PII: S0300-9572(10)00003-1

doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.12.018

Resuscitation
Volume 81, Issue 4 , Pages 453-456, April 2010

Article Tools