Abstract
Purpose: Blood pressure (BP) assessment is a key component of pre-participation examinations and can aid athletic trainers (ATs) in diagnosing hypertension. However, the current pedagogical technique, which involves practicing BP assessment on healthy individuals, may not adequately prepare healthcare providers to recognize Korotkoff sounds at abnormal pressures during clinical practice. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine AT's ability to and confidence in assessing and interpreting BP using a high-fidelity simulator.
Methods: We recruited ATs through conferences, in-services, and postprofessional athletic training programs. In total, 100 ATs from various job settings (age=31±11 years; men=37, women=63, clinical experience=8±10 years; self-identified hearing concerns=31; previous simulation experience=36) completed the cross-sectional study focused on descriptive quality assurance. First, participants verbally reported the professional guidelines they used in clinical practice to interpret findings. Second, ATs completed a practice trial BP assessment to familiarize themselves with the provided stethoscope, cuff, and high-fidelity manikin. Then, ATs completed 3 randomized BP assessment trials out of 11 pre-set BP cases. Participants reported the systolic and diastolic reading, interpretation (hypotension, hypertension, normal), and their confidence (0%=no confidence, 100%=complete confidence) in assessing the BP and the interpretation for that case. Assessment correctness scores were calculated by case, with each correct systolic or diastolic value within a ±5 mmHg range counting as 1 and each incorrect value as 0.
Results: Most participants (n=48) used the American Heart Association BP interpretation guidelines. Participants had a low overall assessment correctness score (42.67±20.88%) with only 50% of the systolic values (n=150; mean difference=-5.85±13.32) and 68.7% of the diastolic values (n=206; mean difference=-0.34±9.60) reported within ±5 mmHg. Participants were most accurate with Case 5 (normal) and least accurate with Case 2 (hypertensive). The participants correctly interpreted the BP by their reported guidelines in 56.3% of the trials (n=169). Despite the substandard performance, participants expressed high confidence in BP assessment (80±16%) and interpretation (87±16%).
Conclusions: We identified a confidence-to-practice gap using simulation-based assessment with ATs having low achievement in assessing and interpreting BP despite their high confidence levels.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by a grant from the University of South Carolina Honors College. We want to acknowledge the research assistance provided by Nicholas Dell'Omo (University of South Carolina).
Recommended Citation
Verde MW, Eberman LE, Emerson DM, Foster ZJ, Winkelmann ZK. Simulation-Based Assessment of Blood Pressure by Certified Athletic Trainers. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice. 2025 Apr 15;23(2), Article 24.
Included in
Cardiology Commons, Diagnosis Commons, Medical Education Commons, Sports Medicine Commons