Purpose Combined video modeling (VM) and video feedback (VF) may be more beneficial than traditional feedback when teaching procedural skills. This study examined whether repeated VM and VF compared with VM alone reduced the time required for medical students to perform peripheral intravenous (IV) cannulation. Methods Twenty-five novice medical students were randomly assigned to groups in a one-way blinded embedded mixed-methods study to perform IV cannulation.Participants received standardized instruction and performed IV cannulation on each other while being audio-video recorded. They were assigned to review a video of an expert performing IV cannulation (VM alone), or both the expert video and a video of their own most recent IV cannulation (VM?VF), before returning to perform another IV cannulation. This was repeated for a total of four IV cannulation encounters and three video reviews. A post-test interview was also conducted and analyzed qualitatively using thematic content analysis. Results The median [interquartile range] time required to perform IV cannulation in the final encounter was significantly different between the VM?VF group vs VM alone group (126 [93-226] sec vs 345 [131-537] sec, respectively; median difference, 111 sec; 95% confidence interval, 8 to 391; P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in IV cannulation success between VM alone and VM?VF in the final encounter (75% vs 85% respectively; P = 0.65). For the VM?VF group, the time to perform IV cannulation was reduced after the final encounter compared with the baseline encounter (P = 0.002), which was not true of the VM alone group (P = 0.35).

Hand ventilation during patient transport is superior using the FIR compared to the SIR to achieve target ventilatory goals and avoid unacceptable ventilatory cycles.

This study demonstrates that a majority of breaths delivered by manual resuscitation device fall outside of target range regardless of provider experience or device type. The mechanical ventilator (Hamilton-T1) outperforms the other positive-pressure ventilation methods with respect to delivery of important ventilation parameters. In contrast, 100% of breaths delivered by the LTV 1200 were deemed unacceptable.