Impact of a Blended-Learning Rapid Sequence Intubation Training Program on Emergency Physician Confidence: A Single-Center Program Evaluation

Abstract

Background:  Rapid Sequence Intubation (RSI) is a high-risk, time-critical procedure in emergency medicine. Standardizing its practice across a multinational workforce with diverse training backgrounds remains a persistent educational challenge. This mixed-methods program evaluation assessed a blended-learning RSI program’s impact on self-reported physician confidence and perceived educational value within a tertiary emergency care setting. Methods:  A retrospective evaluation was conducted for a blended-learning RSI curriculum delivered between 2020 and 2022. The program combined asynchronous online modules with a 4-hour, small-group simulation-based practical session. A voluntary, anonymous post-program survey was administered in 2025 following IRB approval. Outcomes included retrospective pre-post self-reported confidence (5-point Likert scale), satisfaction with program components, and qualitative feedback. No objective performance measures were assessed. Results:  Forty-five of 141 eligible physicians completed the survey (adjusted response rate 42%). Self-reported low confidence decreased from 77.8% pre-course to 6.6% post-course, while high confidence increased from 22.2% to 93.4% (Cohen’s d = 2.1). Improvements were consistent across professional grades. The simulation-based session received the highest satisfaction rating (mean 4.3/5). Qualitative analysis highlighted the value of realistic simulation, structured debriefing, and standardized checklists. Suggested improvements included more complex scenarios and enhanced online interactivity. Conclusion:  Participation in a blended-learning RSI program was associated with substantial improvement in self-reported physician confidence and high satisfaction among a multinational emergency medicine workforce. These findings support the feasibility and perceived value of this educational approach for high-risk procedural training in similar settings, though objective competence was not evaluated.