The effect of peer-group size on the delivery of feedback in basic life support refresher training: a cluster randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background: Students are largely providing feedback to one another when instructor facilitates peer feedback rather than teaching in group training. The number of students in a group affect the learning of students in the group training. We aimed to investigate whether a larger group size increases students' test scores on a post-training test with peer feedback facilitated by instructor after video-guided basic life support (BLS) refresher training. Students' one-rescuer adult BLS skills were assessed by a 2-min checklist-based test 1 year after the initial training.

Methods: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of student number in a group on BLS refresher training. Participants included 115 final-year medical students undergoing their emergency medicine clerkship. The median number of students was 8 in the large groups and 4 in the standard group. The primary outcome was to examine group differences in post-training test scores after video-guided BLS training. Secondary outcomes included the feedback time, number of feedback topics, and results of end-of-training evaluation questionnaires.

Results: Scores on the post-training test increased over three consecutive tests with instructor-led peer feedback, but not differ between large and standard groups. The feedback time was longer and number of feedback topics generated by students were higher in standard groups compared to large groups on the first and second tests. The end-of-training questionnaire revealed that the students in large groups preferred the smaller group size compared to their actual group size.

Conclusions: In this BLS refresher training, the instructor-led group feedback increased the test score after tutorial video-guided BLS learning, irrespective of the group size. A smaller group size allowed more participations in peer feedback.

Keywords: Basic life support; Cardiac arrest; Cardiopulmonary resuscitation; Educational assessment; Feedback; Instructor; Medical education; Training; Undergraduate medical education.

Fig. 1

The participation flow chart

Fig. 2

The scores between standard and large groups over three consecutive post-training test. ST1, scores in standard groups at first test;, LA1, scores in large groups at first test; ST2, scores in standard groups at second test; LA2, scores in high groups at second test; ST3, scores in standard groups at third test; LA3, scores in high groups at third test