One factor contributing to the high variation in outcomes across hospitals is the inconsistency in training that is associated with classroom learning . Due to the COVID-19 pandemic , many healthcare organizations have begun to further question their reliance on in-person instructors . Research supports that some improvements can come with more automated instruction using high fidelity manikins . In one recent study , 90 CPR assessments were performed by 16 instructor pairs . The study found that instructors passed 81 learners ( 90 %), whereas the manikin pass rate was 2 %, highlighting that disparity between automated instructors and in-person instructors , specifically in the area of adequate chest compression depth . The study concluded , “ Certified BLS instructors assess CPR skills poorly . Particularly , improper chest compression depth and rescue breaths are not identified ” ( Hansen et al ., 2019 ).
Scientific Evidence Evaluation : The Cornerstone of Guideline Development
It isn ’ t just new technologies that are being applied to resuscitation training ; the science behind resuscitation practices continues to grow , with new studies published daily . The American Red Cross uses the Scientific Advisory Committee to help evaluate the many scientific studies and reviews on all aspects of resuscitation science and education . This 50 + member group of resuscitation specialists , physicians , nurses , paramedics , educators , and researchers evaluate the most recent studies , guidelines , and recommendations from a large
4