Ex-vivo and live animal models are equally effective training for the management of a penetrating cardiac injury

Table 2 Global Rating Scale score, amount of hemorrhage, overall evaluation, checklist and time required to repair comparing ex-vivo and live tissue groups

Study group (n = number of evaluation forms)	Ex-vivo (n = 64)	Live tissue (n = 60)	P value
Global Rating Scale (sum of scores for seven items, Range 7–35)	25.2 (6.3)	24.7 (6.3)	0.646
Amount of hemorrhage (Range 1–3)	1.6 (0.7)	2.0 (0.6)	0.051
Overall evaluation	3.8 (0.9)	3.4 (0.9)	0.037
Checklist	3.7 (0.6)	3.6 (0.9)	0.189
Time required (seconds)^a	101 (31), n=16	107 (15), n=15	0.163

Scores shown are mean (Standard Deviation), using a 5-point Likert scale (range 1–5), except hemorrhage which is rated on a 3-point scale (1 = little, 2 = intermediate, 3 = a lot). Checklist scores are range 0–4. Scores shown are the mean of the four evaluations for all participants
^avalues of n shown for time are number of participants

ISSN: 1749-7922