BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain the leading cause of mortality globally, with sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) due to ventricular tachyarrhythmias accounting for nearly 25% of cardiovascular deaths. Effective simulation-based training is critical for improving clinical performance and outcomes in cardiac emergencies. Simulated Clinical Experience (SCE) and Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice (RCDP) are two structured instructional methods. This study explores which method is more effective in managing cardiac arrest. To compare the effectiveness of RCDP and SCE in improving performance metrics in the management of cardiac arrhythmias. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This pre–post interventional study was conducted among healthcare professionals trained in Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS). Participants ( n = 240) were divided into two equal groups and underwent two simulation scenarios (one baseline and one post-instruction). Key metrics assessed included time to rhythm recognition, initiation of CPR, defibrillation, and identification of Return of Spontaneous Circulation (ROSC). While the SCE group received traditional post-scenario debriefing, the RCDP group underwent sessions with embedded facilitator feedback. Facilitators were blinded to group allocation during assessments. RESULTS: The RCDP group showed significantly faster response times across all measured metrics, along with reduced variability and improved Chest Compression Fractions ( P value = 0.018) and ROSC identification ( P value = 0.003). SCE participants demonstrated improvement, though outcomes were modest. The iterative feedback and repetitive structure of RCDP likely contributed to superior outcomes. CONCLUSION: RCDP offers measurable benefits in enhancing resuscitation performance. However, both methods contribute to skill development.
Rishipathak et al. (Wed,) studied this question.