Main Article Content

Mark Murdock


Education, Basic Life Support, Covid-19, OSCE Examinations


Introduction: To determine if there was a statistical difference in the basic life support (BLS) OSCE grades with different teaching and testing methods used during 3 Covid-19 phases.

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of BLS OSCE grades by Covid-19 Phase, using ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

Results: No statistical difference was found between Covid-19 phase with respect to BLS OSCE grades via ANOVA. Due to normality and n number differences, Kruskal-Wallis test was performed and revealed no significance (p=0.583). Analysis by estimation (effect size and confidence interval) revealed only a slight insignificant decrease of grades in phase 2.

Discussion: ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis revealed no significance and therefore the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. Some difficulties performing BLS OSCEs online included cheating, manikin availability, positional concerns, and technical glitches. Limitations were as follows: video influences, unknown GPA influences, retrospective design, stress influences, ceiling affect and prompter affect.

Conclusion: This study did not support a difference between teaching and testing methods during Covid-19 phases for BLS OSCE grades. These conclusions must be balanced with limitations. Further studies should provide a plan to eliminate or capture any main affects or interactions.


Download data is not yet available.
Abstract 412 | EFFECT OF COVID PHASES Downloads 208


1. Johnson C. Response of practicing chiropractors during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic: a descriptive report. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2020;43(5):403e1-403e21 DOI 10.1016/j.jmpt.2020.05.001, PMID: 3256381.
2. Khalaf K, El-Kishawi M, Adel Moufti M, Al Kawas S. Introducing a comprehensive high-stake online exam to final-year dental students during the COVID-19 pandemic and evaluation of its effectiveness. Med Ed Online 2020;25:1-10 DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2020.1826861.
3. Johnson C, Green B. Harnessing the web: how chiropractic education survives and thrives during COVID-19 pandemic. online conference. Chiro Educators Research Forum (CERF) 2020-12-5.
4. Carmargo CP, Tempski PZ, Busnardo FF, d Aruda Martins M, Gemperli R. Online learning and COVID-19: a meta-synthesis analysis. CLINICS 2020;75:e2286 DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2020/e2286.
5. Kim JH, Park H. Effects of smartphone-based mobile learning in nursing education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian Nurs J 2019;13(1):1-29 DOI:
6. Liu Q, Peng W, Zhang F, Hu R, Li Y, Yan W. The effectiveness of blended learning in health professions: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res 2016;18(1):e2 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4807: 10.2196/jmir.4807.
7. Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Ed Online 2019;24(1666538):1-13 DOI:
8. Bajpai S, Semwal M, Bajpai R, Car J, Hau Yan Ho A. Health professions’ digital education: review of learning theories in randomized controlled trials by the Digital Health Education Collaboration. J Med Internet Res 2019;21(3):1-22 DOI: 10.2196/12912: 10.2196/12912.
9. American Red Cross. CPR/AED for the professional rescuer and healthcare provider. 2016;1-133 ISBN: 978-0-9983745-3-6.
10. Sinha S, Sukul D, Lazarus J, et al. Identifying important gaps in randomized controlled trials of adult cardiac arrest treatments: a systematic review of the published literature. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2016;Nov 9(6):1-17 DOI:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.
11. Kadakia R, Chen E, Ohyama H. Implementing an online OSCE during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Dent Educ. 2020;NA:1-3 DOI:10.1002/jdd.12323.
12. Nord A, Svensson L, Claesson A, et al. The effect of a national web course “Help-Brain-Heart” as a supplemental learning tool before CPR training: a cluster randomised trial. Scand J of Trauma, Res and Emerg Med 2017;25(93):1-10 DOI: 10.1186/s13049-017-0439-0.
13. Bylow H, Karlsson T, Lepp M, Claesson A, Lindqvist J, Herlitz J. Effectiveness of web-based education in addition to basic life support learning activities: A cluster randomised controlled trial. PLOS ONE. 2019;July 11:1-19 DOI 14(7):e0219341. 10.1371/journal.pone.0219341.
14. Nascimento JdSG, Nascimento KGd, de Oliveira JLG, Alves MG, da Silva AR, Dalri MCB. Clinical simulation for nursing competence development in cardiopulmonary resuscitation: systematic review. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem 2020;28(e3391):1-10 DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.4094.3391.
15. Garcia-Suarez M, Mendez-Martinez C, Martinez-Isasi S, Gomez-Salgodo J, Fernandez-Garcia D. Basic life support training methods for health science students: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16(768):1-15 DOI:10.3390/ijerph16050768.
16. Moon H, Sun Hyun H. Nursing students’ knowledge, attitude, selfefficacy in blended learning of cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Medical Education 2019;19(414):1-8 DOI:
17. Lehmann R, Thiessen C, Frick B, et al. [ed.] Eysenbach G. Improving pediatric basic life support performance through blended learning with web-based virtual patients: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 2015;17(7):e162 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.4141: 10.2196/jmir.4141
18. Fields A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage; Los Angeles. 2013;4th Ed:169, 442 ISBN 978-1-4462-4917-8.
19. Triola M. Elementary statistics. Pearson: Boston, 2006;10th Ed:280-281. ISBN 0-321-33182-6.
20. Cummings G. Understanding the new statistics: effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. Routledge; New York. 2012;1st Ed:1-20 ISBN 978-0-415-87967-5.