Methods: This study was a prospective cohort design with a historical comparison group. It was conducted to assess the difference in 30-day readmissions and mortality and to assess compliance rate with HF guideline between the historical pre-intervention audit 1 cohort and prospective post-intervention audit 2 cohorts. Audit 1 cohort were recruited from January to February 2019, whereas, audit 2 cohort which received the bundled intervention program were recruited from July to December 2019. Clinical outcomes were compared between cohorts using 30-day readmissions and mortality.
Results: A total of 50 and 164 patients were included in audit 1 and audit 2 cohort, respectively. Patients in the audit 2 cohort were younger [63.0 ± 14.5 in audit 1 vs 56.5 ± 12.7 in audit 2, p = 0.003] and majority were male [50.0% in audit 1 vs 72.0% in audit2, p = 0.004]. Thirty-day readmissions were significantly different [36.0% audit 1 vs. 22.0% audit 2, p = 0.045], but the mortality rates were similar [4.0%% audit 1 vs. 5.5% audit 2, p = 0.677] between two cohorts.
Conclusion: A significant decrease in 30-day readmissions was observed in the post-intervention audit 2 cohort in our setting. Further study in larger population and prolong study follow-up is warranted.
METHODS: This randomized controlled pilot study was conducted with 30 healthcare practitioners at the University of Malaysia Sabah. Participants underwent a Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Practical formal educational training program, and data were collected using a Basic Life Support questionnaire and skills assessment checklist sourced from the American Heart Association (2020). Data analysis was conducted utilizing repeated analysis of variance and the Cochran 'Q' test supported by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences statistical software.
RESULT: The control and intervention groups showed improved knowledge and skills from pre-to post-cardiopulmonary resuscitation courses; a significant increase was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. The F-test indicated a significant time-group effect (F-stat (df) = 16.14 (2), p = 0.01). Cochran's 'Q' test also revealed significant changes in the proportion of healthcare practitioners passing their skills assessments over time (2 = 14.90, control 01).
CONCLUSION: The smart-cardiopulmonary resuscitation application is convenient for refreshing cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills and maintaining proficiency. While it doesn't replace formal cardiopulmonary resuscitation courses, it saves healthcare practitioners and the community time and money. Both groups showed improved cardiopulmonary resuscitation knowledge and skills, with the intervention group using the smart-cardiopulmonary resuscitation application showing higher success rates after two months. Adopting smartphone-based cardiopulmonary resuscitation training with comprehensive content is recommended.