Sudden death resulting from cardiorespiratory arrest carries a high mortality rate and frequently occurs out of hospital. Immediate initiation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by witnesses, combined with automated external defibrillator (AED) use, has proven to double survival rates. Recognising the challenges of timely emergency services in rural areas, the implementation of basic CPR training programmes can improve survival outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of online CPR-AED training among residents in a rural area of Tarragona, Spain.

Quasi-experimental design, comprising two phases. Phase 1 involves assessing the effectiveness of online CPR-AED training in terms of knowledge acquisition. Phase 2 focuses on evaluating participant proficiency in CPR-AED simulation manoeuvres at 1 and 6 months post training. The main variables include the score difference between pre-training and post-training test (phase 1) and the outcomes of the simulated test (pass/fail; phase 2). Continuous variables will be compared using Student’s t-test or Mann-Whitney U test, depending on normality. Pearson’s ² test will be applied for categorical variables. A multivariate analysis will be conducted to identify independent factors influencing the main variable.

This study adheres to the tenets outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and of Good Clinical Practice. It operated within the Smartwatch project, approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the Primary Care Research Institute IDIAP Jordi Gol i Gurina Foundation, code 23/081-P. Data confidentiality aligns with Spanish and European Commission laws for the protection of personal data. The study’s findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.

NCT05747495.

The Improving the Wellbeing of people with Opioid Treated CHronic pain (I-WOTCH) randomised controlled trial found that a group-based educational intervention to support people using strong opioids for chronic non-malignant pain helped a significant proportion of people to stop or decrease opioid use with no increase in pain-related disability. We report a linked process evaluation of the group-based intervention evaluated in comparison to a usual-care control group that received a self-help booklet and relaxation CD.

We interviewed 18 intervention facilitators, and 20 intervention and 20 control participants who had chronic non-malignant pain and were recruited from general (family) practices in the UK. Quantitative data included change mechanism questions on the trial questionnaires which explored motivation, expectations and self-efficacy. Fidelity was assessed by listening to a sample of audio-recorded group sessions and nurse consultations. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated using ‘follow a thread’ and a mixed-methods matrix.

Four overarching themes emerged: (1) the right time to taper, (2) the backdrop of a life with chronic pain, (3) needing support and (4) the benefits of being in a group. Delivery fidelity was good, adherence (83%) and competence (79%) across a range of intervention groups. Staff delivering the intervention found three typical responses to the intervention: resistance, open to trying and feeling it was not the right time. The group experience was important to those in the intervention arm. It provided people with a forum in which to learn about the current thinking about opioid usage and its effects. It also gave them examples of how feasible or personally relevant coming off opioids might be.

The process evaluation data showed that the I-WOTCH intervention was well delivered, well received and useful for most interviewees. Being ‘the right time’ to taper and having support throughout tapering, emerged as important factors within the context of living with chronic pain.

ISRCTN49470934.