Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/75911
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWiput Laosuksrien_US
dc.contributor.authorBoriboon Chenthanakijen_US
dc.contributor.authorKrongkarn Suthamen_US
dc.contributor.authorWetchayan Rangsrien_US
dc.contributor.authorRadom Pongvuthithamen_US
dc.contributor.authorChaiy Rungsiyakullen_US
dc.contributor.authorThawan Sucharitakulen_US
dc.contributor.authorNavadon Khunlertgiten_US
dc.contributor.authorBorwon Wittayachamnankulen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-16T07:03:35Z-
dc.date.available2022-10-16T07:03:35Z-
dc.date.issued2022-07-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn26300559en_US
dc.identifier.issn25869981en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85130291351en_US
dc.identifier.other10.31584/jhsmr.2021856en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85130291351&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/75911-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: The use of a cardiopulmonary resuscitation feedback device and automated external defibrillator trainer is beneficial in basic life support (BLS) training. Nevertheless, Thailand lacks these devices in BLS support training. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of the Chiang Mai BLS training devices with conventional training devices in BLS training for laypeople. Material and Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of the Chiang Mai device group with the conventional device group, by assessing the theory and practical examination scores of the participants; who were adult, laypeople attending the BLS provider course endorsed by the Thai Resuscitation Council. Evaluating instructors were blinded from both groups of participants. Results: A total of 60 adult, laypeople participants were divided into two groups: 32 and 28 participants of the Chiang Mai device group and conventional device group, respectively. Overall examination scores of included participants were very high. The participants in the Chiang Mai device group had a higher median score of multiple-choice question assessment [9.0/9.0 (8.5-9.0) vs 8.5/9.0 (8.0-9.0) points, p-value=0.134] as well as a higher median score of practical examination [26.0/26.0 (24.3-26.0) vs 25.0/26.0 (24.0-26.0) points, p-value=0.278] when compared to those using conventional BLS training devices. However, there was no statistical significance between both groups.en_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleEffectiveness of Innovation Basic Life Support Training Devices to Layperson: A Randomized Controlled Trialen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleJournal of Health Science and Medical Researchen_US
article.volume40en_US
article.stream.affiliationsFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.