Comparing two different schedules of online learning for updated cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines in Covid-19 patients: A randomized study

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is an evolving disease with newly generated evidence related to the clinical management of Covid-19 patients. We aimed to compare two online learning schedules for disseminating new cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines in terms of knowledge gain and acceptability among nurses. Methods In a prospective randomized controlled study, 61 nurses trained in comprehensive cardiopulmonary life support (CCLS) were randomized to synchronous ( n =31) and asynchronous learning groups ( n = 30). The enhanced training module on CPR (ETMCPR) prepared by a team of experts was used to impart training to the nurses. Baseline data and pre-intervention knowledge of participants were collected using a structured demographic sheet and knowledge questionnaire (25 items) in a google form. Nurses in the synchronous group were provided training using ETMCPR through a licensed Zoom platform, while the nurses in the asynchronous group had access to the uploaded ETMCPR module in the e-learning platform. At the end of the intervention, the knowledge of the nurses was assessed along with their acceptability to the online learning schedule. Results Both schedules of online learning were effective in improving the knowledge scores of the nurses (11.93 [3.26] v . 21.15 [1.90], p=0.01 and 11.71 [3.12] v . 20.32 [1.71], p=0.01). The mean acceptability scores of nurses in the asynchronous group were statistically lower than in the synchronous group (38.93 [2.50] v . 42.5 [3.08], p=0.007). Conclusion Both synchronous and asynchronous schedules of online learning were effective in disseminating updated CPR guidelines; however, nurses in the synchronous group were more satisfied with the learning schedule.