Research in Health and Medical Sciences
Wed, Jul 9, 2025
[Archive]
Volume 2, Issue 2 (6-2023)
2023, 2(2): 21-32 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Shafaei H, Ostadtaghizadeh A, Khorasani-Zavareh D, Hirshon J M, Nematollahi S, Mirhaghi A H et al . Comparison of Two Guidelines for Road Traffic Crash Bystanders: A Randomized Controlled Simulation Study. Journal title 2023; 2 (2) :21-32
URL: http://jrhms.thums.ac.ir/article-1-76-en.html
URL: http://jrhms.thums.ac.ir/article-1-76-en.html
Hojjat Shafaei 
, Abbas Ostadtaghizadeh , Davoud Khorasani-Zavareh , Jon Mark Hirshon , Shahrzad Nematollahi , Amir Hosein Mirhaghi , Mohammad Javad Moradian
, Abbas Ostadtaghizadeh , Davoud Khorasani-Zavareh , Jon Mark Hirshon , Shahrzad Nematollahi , Amir Hosein Mirhaghi , Mohammad Javad Moradian
Department of Health in Emergencies and Disasters, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , shafaeeh1@gmail.com
Abstract: (6 Views)
r providing first aid in a simulation.
Method: The authors compared two sets of guidelines for emergency dispatchers to advise bystanders providing first aid for road traffic crashes (RTC) in an Iranian city. A “Step by step guideline” (Bystanders of road traffic crashes (RTC) can provide lifesaving first aid and assistance to injured individuals. Emergency medical dispatchers can guide these bystanders. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of guidelines for emergency medical dispatchers in instructing bystanders at road traffic crash scenes to administer first aid through a simulation. The authors compared two sets of guidelines for emergency dispatchers to advice bystanders providing first aid for road traffic crashes (RTC) in an Iranian city. A “Step by Step Guideline” (SBSG) was considered standard, while a “Road Traffic Crash Bystander Guideline” (RTCBG) served as a more thoughtfully designed alternative. Two dispatchers with at least a year of experience received 3 hours of training on SBSG, and two other dispatchers were trained for 3 hours on RTCBG. Sixty-four non-medical voluntary subjects attempted to provide first aid in RTC simulations and were randomly assigned to be advised by dispatchers trained in either SBSG or RTCBG. 30 subjects were in the RTCBG group and 31 subjects in the SBSG group. In terms of the main outcome of the study, the total score of the participants in the RTCTBG group was significantly higher than that of the SBSG group (mean: 56.60 vs 44.06, P <0.001). In first aid, standard precautions (mean: 3.40 VS 1, P <0.001), airway protection (mean: 2.43 VS 1, Haines recovery position (mean: 2.57 VS 1, P <0.001), rapid evacuation (mean: 2.13 VS 1, P <0.001), splinting (mean: 3.10 VS 1, P <0.001), scene management (mean: 2.90 VS 1, P <0.001), movement (mean: 2.93 VS 2.58, P = 0.04), RTCTBG group scored higher than SBSG group (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of the accuracy of performing airway protection, Haines recovery position, rapid evacuation, scene management, splinting, and standard precautions (P <0.001). The difference between the two groups was significant in terms of execution time (P <0.001). The voluntary subjects assigned to a dispatcher trained with RTCBG performed better on average than those assigned to a dispatcher trained with SBSG. Participants guided by RTCBG demonstrated higher quality first aid compared to those guided by SBSG. RTCBG's guidance led to an improvement in the participants' quality score during the simulated traffic crash sceneSBSG) was apparently considered - standard, and a “Road Traffic Crash Bystander Guideline” (RTCBG) was a more carefully designed alternative. Two dispatchers with at least a year of experience were given 3 hours of training with SBSG, and two other dispatchers were given 3 hours of training with RTCBG. 64 non-medical voluntary subjects attempted to provide first aid in RTC simulations, randomly assigned to be advised by dispatchers trained with SBSG or with RTCBG.
Results: 30 subjects were in RTCBG group and 31 subjects in SBSG group. In terms of the main outcome of the study, the total score of the participants in RTCTBG group was higher than SBSG group (mean: 56.60 VS 44.06, P <0.001). In first aid, standard precautions (mean: 3.40 VS 1, P <0.001), airway protection (mean: 2.43 VS 1, Haines recovery position (mean: 2.57 VS 1, P <0.001), rapid evacuation (mean: 2.13 VS 1, P <0.001), splinting (mean: 3.10 VS 1, P <0.001), scene management (mean: 2.90 VS 1, P <0.001), movement (mean: 2.93 VS 2.58, P = 0.04), RTCTBG group scored higher than SBSG group (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of the accuracy of performing airway protection, Haines recovery position, rapid evacuation, scene management, splinting, and standard precautions p <0.001. The difference between the two groups was significant in terms of execution time P <0.001.
Discussion: The voluntary subjects assigned to a dispatcher trained with RTCBG performed better on average than those assigned to a dispatcher trained with SBSG. The quality of first aid was higher in participants guided by RTCBG. RTCBG could improve the participants’ quality score in the simulated traffic crash scene by better guiding them compared to SBSG.
Method: The authors compared two sets of guidelines for emergency dispatchers to advise bystanders providing first aid for road traffic crashes (RTC) in an Iranian city. A “Step by step guideline” (Bystanders of road traffic crashes (RTC) can provide lifesaving first aid and assistance to injured individuals. Emergency medical dispatchers can guide these bystanders. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of guidelines for emergency medical dispatchers in instructing bystanders at road traffic crash scenes to administer first aid through a simulation. The authors compared two sets of guidelines for emergency dispatchers to advice bystanders providing first aid for road traffic crashes (RTC) in an Iranian city. A “Step by Step Guideline” (SBSG) was considered standard, while a “Road Traffic Crash Bystander Guideline” (RTCBG) served as a more thoughtfully designed alternative. Two dispatchers with at least a year of experience received 3 hours of training on SBSG, and two other dispatchers were trained for 3 hours on RTCBG. Sixty-four non-medical voluntary subjects attempted to provide first aid in RTC simulations and were randomly assigned to be advised by dispatchers trained in either SBSG or RTCBG. 30 subjects were in the RTCBG group and 31 subjects in the SBSG group. In terms of the main outcome of the study, the total score of the participants in the RTCTBG group was significantly higher than that of the SBSG group (mean: 56.60 vs 44.06, P <0.001). In first aid, standard precautions (mean: 3.40 VS 1, P <0.001), airway protection (mean: 2.43 VS 1, Haines recovery position (mean: 2.57 VS 1, P <0.001), rapid evacuation (mean: 2.13 VS 1, P <0.001), splinting (mean: 3.10 VS 1, P <0.001), scene management (mean: 2.90 VS 1, P <0.001), movement (mean: 2.93 VS 2.58, P = 0.04), RTCTBG group scored higher than SBSG group (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of the accuracy of performing airway protection, Haines recovery position, rapid evacuation, scene management, splinting, and standard precautions (P <0.001). The difference between the two groups was significant in terms of execution time (P <0.001). The voluntary subjects assigned to a dispatcher trained with RTCBG performed better on average than those assigned to a dispatcher trained with SBSG. Participants guided by RTCBG demonstrated higher quality first aid compared to those guided by SBSG. RTCBG's guidance led to an improvement in the participants' quality score during the simulated traffic crash sceneSBSG) was apparently considered - standard, and a “Road Traffic Crash Bystander Guideline” (RTCBG) was a more carefully designed alternative. Two dispatchers with at least a year of experience were given 3 hours of training with SBSG, and two other dispatchers were given 3 hours of training with RTCBG. 64 non-medical voluntary subjects attempted to provide first aid in RTC simulations, randomly assigned to be advised by dispatchers trained with SBSG or with RTCBG.
Results: 30 subjects were in RTCBG group and 31 subjects in SBSG group. In terms of the main outcome of the study, the total score of the participants in RTCTBG group was higher than SBSG group (mean: 56.60 VS 44.06, P <0.001). In first aid, standard precautions (mean: 3.40 VS 1, P <0.001), airway protection (mean: 2.43 VS 1, Haines recovery position (mean: 2.57 VS 1, P <0.001), rapid evacuation (mean: 2.13 VS 1, P <0.001), splinting (mean: 3.10 VS 1, P <0.001), scene management (mean: 2.90 VS 1, P <0.001), movement (mean: 2.93 VS 2.58, P = 0.04), RTCTBG group scored higher than SBSG group (Table 2). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of the accuracy of performing airway protection, Haines recovery position, rapid evacuation, scene management, splinting, and standard precautions p <0.001. The difference between the two groups was significant in terms of execution time P <0.001.
Discussion: The voluntary subjects assigned to a dispatcher trained with RTCBG performed better on average than those assigned to a dispatcher trained with SBSG. The quality of first aid was higher in participants guided by RTCBG. RTCBG could improve the participants’ quality score in the simulated traffic crash scene by better guiding them compared to SBSG.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2025/01/12 | Accepted: 2025/05/26 | Published: 2025/07/8
Received: 2025/01/12 | Accepted: 2025/05/26 | Published: 2025/07/8
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
