Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the quality of simulated resuscitation between the conventional
simulation training group and the script based training group.
Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of video clips from a previous study of cardiopulmonary resuscitation
(CPR) team simulation training. A total of eighty-four video clips were analyzed. Each video clip belonged to either
the conventional group or the script group, of either pre-training or post-training. One of the authors analyzed all
the video clips. The qualities of resuscitation team plays were compared in terms of the hands-on compression time,
the interval to meaningful measures and the number of utterances of the team leader and members.
Results: The hands-on time of the conventional group improved after training whereas that of the script group
deteriorated (22.2 vs －7.0 sec, p = 0.009). The time to defibrillation also improved in the conventional group
whereas that of the script group deteriorated (－24.0 vs 33.0 sec, p = 0.002). There were no differences in the utterances
of team leaders and members between groups and between pre- and post-training.
Conclusions: This study suggested that the effect of script-based training on quality of CPR was less useful than
that of conventional training using simulation and debriefing. Therefore, CPR team training using a script alone
should not be recommended.