A RELIABLE AND VALID METHOD FOR EVALUATING CARDIOPULMONARY-RESUSCITATION TRAINING OUTCOMES

In order to compare the quality of CPR performance after various train ing methods, training outcome assessment must provide meaningful data and do it in a way that is reliable. Few studies have provided details of their assessment procedures, and even fewer report on whether the measures to evaluate performance are reliable (yielding information co nsistently over multiple trials), or valid (measuring the outcome inte nded). Few studies have attempted to replicate assessment methods used by other authors. Conventional skill sheets have not been shown to as sess compressions and ventilations reliably and validly, When using an instrumented manikin, skill checklists can be simplified by eliminati ng qualitative assessment of compressions and ventilations. Using a sa mple of 171 CPR trainees rated by trained evaluators, we provide detai ls of agreement between two evaluators and use an established statisti c (Cronbach's cr) to assess the reliability of a 14-item simplified CP R checklist. The level of agreement between two raters was high (Pears on product-moment correlation = 0.87) as was the reliability estimate obtained by Cronbach's or (0.89). As criterion-related evidence of the validity of the CPR checklist to assess CPR performance, a correlatio n with a five-point subjective overall rating of CPR was estimated (Sp earman correlation = 0.92). We urge standardized reporting of CPR trai ning outcomes in order to achieve comparability across studies.