Background: Saving more lives, is sustained not only in better science, but above all in the way it is taught. The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is linked to better survival outcomes of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) victims. It is unanimous that CPR skills reduce over time, the need for low-duration and higher-frequency training is consistently presented as a solution.
Aims: Understand the relation between intervals of training and quality of CPR when performed by laypeople with a self-directed re-training program (RTP).
Methods: During 6 months we conducted a RTP with 1 hour length. All candidates had to simulate single rescue approach with AED as their first intervention. We´ve collected data from QualityCPR software (QCPR). Two studies groups were created, G1 with a Basic Life Support (BLS) course in the last 2 years, G2 with a BLS course for more than 2 years. All candidates with a BLS course from more than 5 years were excluded from the study. It was considered statistically significant a p-value less than 0.05.
Results: 100 went under RTP, G1 with 56 candidates and G2 with 44. When looking for overall score of QCPR G1 had a better performance (89%vs77%) (p<0,05); the compression score and ventilation score was also better for G1 (95%vs90% and 87%vs75%).
Conclusions: The results show higher quality CPR in G1, that comes in line with the European Resuscitation Council guidelines, that retraining should take place at least every 12–24 months (Greif, R. 2015). Although there is still no strong evidence in the ideal time for the certification of courses, this study shows that laypeople with training in a space of less than 2 years, present better performance in terms of CPR quality. However, given the reduced sample size, further studies on the most appropriate interval are recommended.

3 - What is the most suitable interval for training in Basic Life Support ? – Lessons Learned form Self-directed Re-training Program with Instructor Lead Debriefing