Dispatchers should be trained to interrogate bystanders with strict protocols to elicit information focused on recognizing cardiac arrest and should provide telephone cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) instructions in all cases of suspected cardiac arrest. While an objective assessment of training outcomes is needed, there is no performance assessment scale for simulated dispatcher-assisted CPR.

The aim of the study was to create a valid and reliable performance assessment scale for simulated dispatcher-assisted CPR.

In this prospective, randomized, controlled, multi-centric simulation-based trial (registration number TCTR20210130002), the scale was developed according to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines 2015 and revised by experts. The performance of 48 dispatchers’ telephone-CPR and of 48 bystanders carrying out CPR on a manikin was assessed by two independent evaluators using the scale and using a SkillReporter (PC) software to provide CPR objective performance. Continuous variables were described as mean (SD) and categorical variables as numbers and percentage (%). Comparative analysis between two groups used a Student t-test or a non-parametric test of Mann-Whitney. The internal structure of the scale was evaluated, including internal consistency using α Cronbach coefficient, and reproducibility using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and linear correlation coefficient (R2) calculation.

The scale included three different parts: two sections for dispatchers’ (32 items) and bystanders’ CPR performance (15 items) assessment, and a third part recording times. There was excellent internal consistency (α Cronbach coefficient = 0.77) and reproducibility (ICC = 0.93; R² = 0.86). For dispatchers’ performance assessment, α Cronbach coefficient = 0.76; ICC = 0.91; R2 = 0.84. For bystanders’ performance assessment, α Cronbach coefficient = 0.75; ICC = 0.93; R2 = 0.87. Reproducibility was excellent for nine items, good for 19 items, and moderate for 19 items. No item had poor reproducibility. There was no significant difference between dispatch doctors’ and medical dispatch assistants’ performances (33.0 [SD = 4.7] versus 32.3 [SD = 3.2] out of 52, respectively; P = .70) or between trained and untrained bystanders to follow the instructions (14.3 [SD = 2.0] versus 13.9 [SD = 1.8], respectively; P = .64). Objective performance (%) was significantly higher for trained bystanders than for untrained bystanders (67.4 [SD = 14.5] versus 50.6 [SD = 19.3], respectively; P = .03).

The scale was valid and reliable to assess performance for simulated dispatcher-assisted CPR. To the authors’ knowledge, no other valid performance tool currently exists. It could be used in simulated telephone-CPR training programs to improve performance.

Hand hygiene is the primary measure for reducing nosocomial infections based on 7 steps recommended by the WHO. The aim of this study was to assess the duration and the quality of hand hygiene before and after simulation-based training (SBT).

The study took place in a University Hospital Pediatric Department among its residents and nurses. In assessment A, 10 hand-rubbing procedures per participant during a work day were scored by observers using a validated, anatomically based assessment scale. Two weeks later, all participants received a didactic course and SBT, followed 1 month later by assessment B, observation of 10 hand-rubbing procedures. Assessments were performed by 2 independent observers. Before-and-after testing was used to evaluate the demonstration of theoretical knowledge.

In total, 22 participants were included, for whom 438 hand hygiene procedures were assessed: 218 for assessment A and 220 for assessment B. The duration of hand rubbing increased from 31.16 seconds in assessment A to 35.75 seconds in assessment B (P=.04). In assessment A, participants averaged 6.33 steps, and in assessment B, participants averaged 6.03 steps (difference not significant). Significant improvement in scores was observed between assessments A and B, except for the dorsal side of the right hand. The wrist and interdigital areas were the least-cleaned zones. A difference between assessments A and B was observed for nail varnish (P=.003) but not for long nails or jewelry. Theoretical scores increased from 2.83 to 4.29 (scale of 0–5; P<.001).

This study revealed that an optimal number of steps were performed during hand-rubbing procedures and that SBT improved the duration and quality of hand hygiene, except for the dorsal right side. Emphasis should be placed on the specific hand areas that remained unclean after regular hand-rubbing procedures.