Skip to main content

Table 6 Post training and post evaluation questionnaires

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

Study group (n = number of participants)

Questionnaire

Ex-vivo (n = 16)

Live tissue (n = 15)

P value

I am satisfied with this training.

Post-training

4.5 (0.6)

4.9 (0.3)

0.078

Post-evaluation

4.8 (0.4)

4.9 (0.4)

0.599

My interest in trauma care has increased.

Post-training

4.4 (0.9)

4.6 (0.8)

0.423

Post-evaluation

4.6 (0.6)

4.6 (0.5)

1.000

I am confident to perform hemostatic procedures for a cardiac injury.

Post-training

3.2 (1.0)

3.7 (0.7)

0.140

Post-evaluation

3.7 (0.9)

3.8 (0.7)

0.770

I would recommend this training to my colleagues.

Post-training

4.3 (0.7)

4.6 (0.5)

0.318

Post-evaluation

4.6 (0.6)

4.7 (0.5)

1.000

I obtained new knowledge and skills to achieve hemostasis of a cardiac injury.

Post-training

4.6 (0.6)

4.9 (0.4)

0.247

Post-evaluation

4.6 (0.5)

4.8 (0.6)

0.202

I would like to repeat this training.

Post-training

4.3 (0.8)

4.5 (0.6)

0.495

Post-evaluation

4.8 (0.4)

4.6 (0.5)

0.495

  1. Scores shown are mean (Standard Deviation), using a 5-point Likert scale (range 1–5). P-values shown are comparing the two study groups, ex-vivo and live tissue