Advanced Cardiac Life Support instruction in the new norm: Evaluating the hybrid versus the traditional model

Abstract

Introduction: Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) course is one of the mandatory certifications for the majority of medical as well as some nursing professionals. There are, however, multiple variations in its instruction model worldwide. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of traditional ACLS course versus a hybrid ACLS course utilised during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This retrospective study was carried out at SingHealth Duke-NUS Institute of Medical Simulation using course results of participants in the centre’s ACLS course between May to October 2019 for the traditional course were compared with participants attending the hybrid course from February to June 2021. Results: A total of 925 participants were recruited during the study period. Of these, 626 participants were from the traditional group and 299 participants were from the hybrid learning group. There is no statistically significant difference between the two group (χ2=1.02 p = 0.313) in terms of first pass attempts; first pass attempt at MCQ (p=0.805) and first pass attempt at practical stations (p=0.408). However, there was statistically significant difference between the mean difference in results of traditional vs hybrid MCQ score, -0.29 (95% CI: -0.57 to -0.01, p=0.0409). Finally, senior doctors were also found to perform better than junior doctors in both traditional (p=0.0235) and hybrid courses (p=0.0309) at the first pass attempt of ACLS certification. Conclusion: Participants in the hybrid ACLS course demonstrated at least equal overall proficiency in certification of ACLS as compared to the traditional instruction.