Background The educational efficacy in neonatal resuscitation relies on the subject and teaching strategies. Therefore, it is imperative to test diverse educational methods if they are more instructive to engage students in active learning and practicing knowledge. Hence, the present study aims to investigate the efficacy of a pedagogical framework in neonatal resuscitation skill learning among nursing students in a resource-limited setting. Methods A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted between October 2020 to March 2021. Sixty nursing students in the 3rd and 4th year of professional training were randomly allocated to the pedagogy and the traditional group. The pedagogy group learned via 6-step LSPPDM (Learn, See, Practice, Prove, Do, Maintain) pedagogy including lectures, video, clinical observation, skill sessions under supervision, and self-directed practice. The traditional group learned through 2-step (Learn, Practice) method that included lectures and skill sessions under supervision. The outcomes measured included technical and non-technical skills in neonatal resuscitation. The technical skill deals with steps such as stimulation, ventilation, oxygenation, intubation, chest compression, medications, and reporting. Non-technical skills refer to teamwork skills that focus on the interaction between leader and helper. Both skills were measured through previously published validated tools two times before and after the intervention by blinded assessors in a simulated delivery room. Results Overall, the skill was significantly improved in both groups after intervention. Yet, the results showed that the mean difference of technical skill score in the pedagogy group (24.3 ± 3.5) was significantly higher (p <  0.001) compared to the traditional group (16.2 ± 2.4). Likewise, the mean difference of non-technical skill score in the pedagogy (36.9 ± 1.9) was highly significant (p <  0.001) compared to the traditional group (31.2 ± 1.7). Conclusions The LSPPDM pedagogy was found more effective in enhancing technical and non-technical skills in neonatal resuscitation compared to the traditional method. The results of this study support the efficacy of the 6-step LSPPDM pedagogy in the education of nursing students regarding neonatal resuscitation in a resource-limited setting. Trial registration Prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04748341).

No abstract

Background Existing predictive scores for early identification of children at high risk of developing asthma include invasive procedures, and hence have limited utility in a primary care setting. The Leicestershire respiratory cohort (LRC) has developed a noninvasive asthma prediction tool (APT) for children with promising results. We aimed to perform its external validation in the French general population Étude Longitudinale Française depuis l'Enfance (ELFE) cohort. Methods Predictive scores were determined at Age 1 and the primary outcome of asthma was defined as parental reporting of “asthma ever or “wheezing in the past 12 months” at Age 5. Logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and performance measures, and discriminative performance was reported using the receiver operating curve and area under curve (AUC). Calibration was assessed using Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness‐of‐fit test and visualized with a calibration plot. Overall performance was determined using Brier scores. Results Of the 10,689 children analyzed: 84.9% were at low, 13.1% medium, and 2% at high risk of developing asthma at Age 5. Children in the medium‐risk category were three times more likely to develop asthma (OR = 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.97–3.78) whereas 13 times more likely in the high‐risk category (OR = 13.8, 95% CI = 10.2–18.8). The tool's AUC was comparable: LRC 0.74 versus ELFE 0.68; as were the Brier scores LRC 0.16 versus ELFE 0.14. The tool's performance was robust to changes in inclusion criteria and outcome definitions. Conclusions and Relevance Results of the present study and previous validation studies performed in high‐risk populations provide a comprehensive measure of the effectiveness of the APT, providing encouragement for its application by general practitioners.

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are widely used in lung cancer management. However, myocarditis, which is a rare, yet potentially severe adverse-related event associated with ICIs, could be under-reported.ObjectivesThis study is aimed to prospectively evaluate the cumulative incidence rate of myocarditis, through systematic screening, among patients receiving ICIs for lung cancer.MethodsAll patients who received the first administration of ICIs for non-small cell (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC), between May and November 2020, in the pulmonary department of Bordeaux University Hospital, were included. Echocardiography (ECG), troponin-I, and natriuretic peptide dosages before ICIs' first administration and before each infusion were recorded. ECG and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were done additionally, in case of at least three times increase in troponin levels, ECG modifications, and the onset of cardiovascular symptoms. Second, if possible, coronarography than endomyocardial biopsy was assessed. The primary outcome was defined as ICIs related to myocarditis onset, while secondary outcomes included other cardiovascular events, disease-free, and overall survival.ResultsDuring the period of interest, 99 patients received their first infusion of ICIs for lung cancer (mean age 64 ± 9 years; 52 men, 67% with adenocarcinoma). Three cases of myocarditis without major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) occurred (two definite and one possible), and the mean duration between the first ICIs' administration and myocarditis onset was 144 ± 3 days. Median disease-free survival and overall survival were 169 [102; 233] days and 209 [147; 249] days, respectively.ConclusionIn our study, systematic screening of myocarditis associated with ICIs leads to a more frequent incidence and a later onset than previously reported. None of them were severe. Additional prospective evidence is needed before we could adopt routine cardiac screening in unselected patients starting ICIs; however, these data shed new light on the risk of myocarditis associated with ICIs administration.