In a recent study (1), Fausto d’Agostino and al. focused on the evaluation of the manual ventilation skills from 20 healthcare professionals, just after attending a CPR ventilation course. They compared the final evaluation scores given by the instructors and by EOlife®.
The results are unquestionable : instructors overestimate trainees ventilation skills.
According to the instructors, 100% of the participants were ventilating in the target, both in 30:2 and continuous mode.According to EOlife®, only 45% of the attendees were able to deliver a correct ventilation rate in 30:2, falling to 5% in continuous mode.
The results are even worst when it comes to tidal volume, with a 5% success rate in 30:2, and 10% in continuous mode.
The conclusion of the article is clear : devices like EOlife® are available, and their use during the courses should be encouraged, rather than rely on subjective perceptions.
Link to the article: Are instructors correctly gauging ventilation competence acquired by course attendees? – PubMed (nih.gov)
(1) D’Agostino, F., Agrò, F. E., Petrosino, P., Ferri, C., & Ristagno, G. (2024). Are instructors correctly gauging ventilation competence acquired by course attendees?. Resuscitation, 200, 110240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2024.110240