Search

Study Objective: To create new versions of the written, multiple-choice examination used in the American Heart Association (AHA) Advanced Cardiac Life Support course, evaluate their reliability and difficulty, and then design revised versions with improved reliability and of standardized difficulty., Design: Psychometric evaluation of new versions of the AHA Advanced Cardiac Life Support test and revisions., Setting: AHA Advanced Cardiac Life Support courses., Participants: Candidates for completion of AHA Advanced Cardiac Life Support provider courses in five states., Intervention: The course content was divided into 11 content areas that were weighted for importance and appropriateness for testing in a multiple-choice format. The weights were used to construct a blueprint for a 50-question, multiple-choice examination. Five versions of the examination were then constructed based on the content blueprint, drawing from new questions and expert revision of previously written questions. Reliability and difficulty were assessed using 915 administrations at five different sites nationwide. The initial test versions differed in their degree of difficulty, which was not explained by demographic factors. The results were used to revise three of the versions to improve reliability and equalize difficulty of the versions., Measurements and Main Results: The final five versions have estimated reliability ranging from Cronbach's alpha of .62 to .86. Mean scores ranged from 87.4% to 89.1%., Conclusion: After field testing and revision, five examinations with acceptable reliability and roughly equal difficulty were constructed. The new examinations test the participants' knowledge of important aspects of resuscitation science and practice based on a blueprint of the course content.

The Panel on Educational Issues in Adult Basic Life Support Training Programs reviewed the characteristics of adult learners, aspects of educational theory, issues concerning barriers to learning and performing CPR, and issues concerning testing and evaluation. The panel made the following recommendations: a comprehensive evaluation of the basic life support program with the goal of improving the program design and educational tools must be initiated; adult programs must be designed to motivate laypersons to become trained in CPR, as well as to target relatives and friends of high-risk individuals; and emotional and attitudinal issues, including the student's reluctance to act in an emergency, must be addressed. Programs must incorporate information on the willingness of an individual to perform CPR; CPR programs must be simplified and focus on critical success factors; flexible educational approaches in programs are encouraged; flexible programming that addresses the needs of the allied health professional is encouraged; formal testing should be eliminated for layperson programs; and formal testing for health care providers and instructors should be continued.

To develop a consensus for change in the educational aspects of the Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) Training Program, the American Heart Association appointed panel members to engage in a consensus process. At a preconference meeting held in the fall of 1991, panel members received broad input from experts in adult education, experienced ACLS educators, and resuscitation scientists. The panel then developed a statement based on the preconference discussions and presented it at the National Conference on CPR and Emergency Cardiac Care held in February 1992. The conference's recommendations and the process that led to them are described in this paper. The key conclusions of the consensus process are as follows. The purpose of ACLS programs is the education of health professionals whose jobs include the management of patients in arrest or near-arrest. The goal of each ACLS course is to have each participant succeed in acquiring the skills and knowledge required for resuscitation. Aspects of the course which threaten failure or raise anxiety should be minimized or eliminated. ACLS course directors are strongly encouraged to design courses whose content and presentation are best suited to the training, experience, and needs of the course participants. Flexibility is strongly encouraged. Evaluation (testing) should be used primarily for its educational value, to help both learners and instructors identify areas needing improvement. The problem learner should be identified as early as possible and should receive intensive remediation to achieve the goal of every participant acquiring the targeted skills and knowledge. Because skill retention is variable, rescuers should practice skills frequently in regular refresher sessions. At a minimum, retraining every two years is strongly recommended.