Comparison of Face to Face vs. Group Training on Self-pulse Rate taking Ability of Patients

H. Saadat, Roxana Sadeghi, Maryam Jannatipour, A. Abadi, Z. Saadat, Saeed Parsa
{"title":"Comparison of Face to Face vs. Group Training on Self-pulse Rate taking Ability of Patients","authors":"H. Saadat, Roxana Sadeghi, Maryam Jannatipour, A. Abadi, Z. Saadat, Saeed Parsa","doi":"10.21859/IJCP-401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Determining the rate and regularity of peripheral arterial pulses has a major role in assessing the clinical status of patients with cardiovascular disorders. We compared two training methods on the ability of patients to take their radial pulse rate accurately. Methods: Three-hundred patients were randomly divided into two arms. One arm received individual face-to-face training and the other arm received group training via displaying an animation movie. Immediately after the training and then after 48 hours, the patients were tested by a nurse to find out whether they have learned the correct technique of taking radial pulse rate or not. Results: Immediately after the intervention, 84.9% in face-to-face arm and 81.8% in group training arm were able to correctly count their radial pulse rate (P = 0.536). After 48 hours, 71.7% in face-to-face and 60.8% in group training arm were able to correctly count their radial pulse rate (P = 0.051). Conclusions: Both methods were effective to improve the ability of the patients to count their radial pulse rate correctly though face-to-face method was marginally superior to group training.","PeriodicalId":31436,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cardiovascular Practice","volume":"119 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cardiovascular Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21859/IJCP-401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Determining the rate and regularity of peripheral arterial pulses has a major role in assessing the clinical status of patients with cardiovascular disorders. We compared two training methods on the ability of patients to take their radial pulse rate accurately. Methods: Three-hundred patients were randomly divided into two arms. One arm received individual face-to-face training and the other arm received group training via displaying an animation movie. Immediately after the training and then after 48 hours, the patients were tested by a nurse to find out whether they have learned the correct technique of taking radial pulse rate or not. Results: Immediately after the intervention, 84.9% in face-to-face arm and 81.8% in group training arm were able to correctly count their radial pulse rate (P = 0.536). After 48 hours, 71.7% in face-to-face and 60.8% in group training arm were able to correctly count their radial pulse rate (P = 0.051). Conclusions: Both methods were effective to improve the ability of the patients to count their radial pulse rate correctly though face-to-face method was marginally superior to group training.
面对面训练与小组训练对患者自我脉搏测量能力的比较
前言:测定外周动脉脉冲的频率和规律性对评估心血管疾病患者的临床状态具有重要作用。我们比较了两种训练方法对患者准确测量桡动脉脉搏率的能力的影响。方法:300例患者随机分为两组。一只手臂接受单独的面对面训练,另一只手臂通过播放动画电影接受集体训练。培训结束后和48小时后,由护士对患者进行测试,以了解患者是否掌握了正确的桡动脉脉搏率测量技术。结果:干预后,面对面组84.9%、组训练组81.8%的患者能正确计数自己的桡动脉脉搏率(P = 0.536)。48小时后,面对面训练组71.7%和组训练组60.8%的患者能够正确计数自己的径向脉搏率(P = 0.051)。结论:两种方法均能有效提高患者正确计算桡动脉脉搏率的能力,但面对面训练略优于小组训练。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信