Evaluating Nursing Students' Performance and Retention of BLS/AED Knowledge and Skills One Year After Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Clinical Snapshot
PICO Framework
| P — Population | 133 nursing students who completed European Resuscitation Council standard BLS/AED course |
| I — Intervention | Post-qualification CPR training via face-to-face (n=43) or e-learning (n=43) methods |
| C — Comparator | Control group with no additional training (n=47) |
| O — Outcomes | CPR knowledge retention (questionnaire based on 2021 ERC Guidelines) and practical skills retention (ERC CPR/AED 11-item checklist) at 12 months post-initial training |
Bottom Line
This RCT demonstrates that nursing students require post-qualification CPR training to maintain competency, with both face-to-face and e-learning methods proving equally effective. After 12 months, students receiving either intervention significantly outperformed controls in both knowledge and practical skills retention. The control group showed significant skill deterioration over time. While the study has methodological limitations including unclear randomisation and lack of confidence intervals, the findings support implementing regular CPR refresher training in nursing education. The equivalence of e-learning to face-to-face training offers practical advantages for scalable, cost-effective delivery. For Australian nursing programs, this evidence supports mandatory annual CPR refresher training and validates e-learning as an acceptable delivery method for maintaining clinical competency standards.
Key Findings
P Value: P < 0.001 for knowledge retention, P < 0.001 for skills retention, P < 0.05 for individual skills
Effect Size: Both intervention groups showed statistically significant improvements in 9 of 11 assessed skills compared to control
Primary Outcome: CPR knowledge and skills retention at 12 months post-initial training
Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not calculable from provided data - no absolute risk reduction or event rates reported
Confidence Interval: Not reported
Clinical Application
Both face-to-face and e-learning interventions showed similar effectiveness, making e-learning a viable cost-effective option for widespread implementation Highly relevant to Australian nursing education programs. Supports ANMAC standards for nursing competency and AHPRA continuing professional development requirements. Could inform nursing curriculum design and mandatory CPR refresher policies Nursing students and newly qualified nurses requiring CPR competency maintenance
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Nurses often serve as the initial responders in cases of cardiac arrest, making cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) competence essential to effective resuscitation. It is therefore important for nursing students to possess sufficient CPR knowledge and skills for future clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine whether CPR post-qualification training is needed in maintaining knowledge and skills and if face-to-face or online training is more effective as an educational method in preserving CPR knowledge and skills in nursing students. METHODS: A three-group, parallel randomized-controlled, single-blind design was used. The participants were 133 nursing students, randomly assigned to the face-to-face group (n = 43), the e-learning group (n = 43), and the control group (n = 47). Before randomization, all participants (n = 133) successfully completed the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) standard five-hour Basic Life Support/Automated External Defibrillation (BLS/AED) course (t0) and a questionnaire based on the 2021 ERC Guidelines to assess their knowledge. Six months later, Group A received face-to-face training, Group B received e-learning training, and Group C had no intervention. Six months after interventions, all participants (n = 133) were re-assessed on the same questionnaire, and they were given the same scenario of cardiopulmonary arrest that was used during the initial BLS course to assess the skills that they retained (t1) with the use of the ERC CPR/AED 11-item checklist. The collected data were analyzed with inferential "among group" analysis involving Kruskal-Wallis's and Pearson's Chi-Squared test and inferential "within group" analysis including Wilcoxon's Signed-Rank and McNemar's test. Multiple linear regression was used for adjusting demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Based on pairwise differences between independent groups, both intervention groups presented higher scores in knowledge at t1 (P < 0.001) and in skills at t1 (P < 0.001) compared to the control group. Moreover, both training methods demonstrated comparable effectiveness. Based on comparisons between paired groups, there was also a statistically significant decrease in the Skill Score in the control group after one year (P < 0.001). Most skills were notably higher, primarily in the e-learning group, and to a lesser extent in the face-to-face group. In specific, intervention groups demonstrated statistically significant improvement in nine of the eleven assessed skills (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The current study showed that post-qualification training is needed to retain CPR knowledge and skills of nursing students, and that face-to-face and e-learning training had similar outcomes.
References
- 1.Leventis, C., Bistaraki, A., Igoumenidis, M., Tzenalis, A., Kiekkas, P., Lakoumentas, J., Marneras, C., & Stefanopoulos, N. (2026). Evaluating Nursing Students' Performance and Retention of BLS/AED Knowledge and Skills One Year After Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X26108917
Related Research
Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association
Telehealth Competency Evaluation Tools: A Scoping Review
3 Aug 2026
Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
Future of Biometric Technology in Healthcare Simulation
2 Aug 2026
International journal of nursing education scholarship
Effect of concept mapping on critical thinking skills in nursing students: a systematic review with meta-analysis
26 July 2026
This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service