SimulationNCT06473090
Comparison of Using a Video vs. a Text to Improve Secure Communication During a Crisis in Anesthesia
A study testing Video group and Text group in people with Simulation and Education, run by Université Paris-Sud.
Trial summary
Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Simulation, Education, Communication
- What is being tested?
- Video group and Text group
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 80 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 26 Jun 2024to 1 Aug 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- anesthesia residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios.
Who cannot join
- technical problem video
- declines active participation in the session
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
Fabien Marquion contact
About this study
Official title: Comparison of Using a Video vs. Text to Improve Learning of Secure Communication During a Crisis in Anesthesia: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study in Simulation
Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care. Secure and standardized communication involves clear, concise, and unambiguous language. Methods of secure communication include closed-loop communication (CLC), precise and complete communication (direct, full dosage), and the use of the SBAR tool. To improve healthcare professionals' communication, it is essential to use effective educational tools. Traditionally, lectures or reading articles were the standard methods. The use of video as a tool for knowledge and skills transfer seems promising. The objective is to compare the learning of secure communication in crisis situations in anesthesia after using two different educational supports: a text versus an educational video.
A prospective, multicenter, controlled, and randomized study will be conducted during high-fidelity simulation sessions in anesthesia, comparing a group using a text-type educational support versus a group using an educational video. It will take place in simulation centers. Voluntary participants will be anesthesia and critical care residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios. After their consent, participants will be randomized into two groups:
Read more
- Text group: Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
- Video group: Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) c) Number of directive verbal orders d) Number of correct medication dosages. This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts (external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2). This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts. The number of verbal orders per scenario will also be recorded.
The secondary endpoint will be to evaluate each item independently, the proportion of CLC per verbal order, satisfaction with the educational tool (Kirkpatrick level 1), and the perception of learning in terms of secure communication (1 to 10 Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 2). Participants' characteristics will also be collected.
Read the detailed description
Introduction Effective resolution of a crisis situation in anesthesia and critical care requires both technical and non-technical skills (1). Non-technical skills (NTS) include leadership, task distribution, teamwork, and communication. Moreover, communication issues are common in the operating room (2). Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (3). Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care (to reduce morbidity and mortality and limit the incidence of adverse events) (1). Secure and standardized communication involves clear, concise, and unambiguous language. Methods of secure communication include closed-loop communication (CLC), precise and complete communication (direct, full dosage), and the use of the SBAR tool (1).
To improve healthcare professionals' communication, it is essential to use effective educational tools. Traditionally, lectures or reading articles were the standard methods. More recently, simulation has shown its value in acquiring these skills (1)(4). However, given the large number of professionals and the limited number of trainers, other educational tools must be developed to allow training for as many professionals as possible.
The use of video as a tool for knowledge and skills transfer seems promising. Nowadays, many teenagers and adults regularly watch videos on digital platforms. Animated images offer many advantages over text. Research in psychology shows that 93% of human communication is non-verbal (5). Additionally, the human brain deciphers different elements of an image simultaneously, whereas spoken or written language is decoded linearly and sequentially, which takes more time (5). Consequently, the use of images for knowledge transfer would be particularly relevant as learning is more effective when visual, oral, or written information is provided simultaneously rather than sequentially (5). In the healthcare field, using images related to written or spoken text has proven particularly effective for knowledge transmission (6). Illustrated text allows participants to develop more complex cognitive structures than those who do not benefit from images (7).
Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the learning of secure communication in crisis situations in anesthesia after using two different educational supports: a text versus an educational video.
Materials and Methods A prospective, multicenter, controlled, and randomized study will be conducted during high-fidelity simulation sessions in anesthesia, comparing a group using a text-type educational support versus a group using an educational video. It will take place in simulation centers. Voluntary participants will be anesthesia residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios.
After their consent, participants will be randomized into two groups:
- Text group: Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
- Video group: Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The educational video used was developed by experts (in Human Factors and Obstetric Anesthesia) and validated by SFAR and CARO. It depicts poor use of NTS (including CLC) during a maternal cardiac arrest anesthesia scenario and then proper use of NTS during the same scenario. The text-type educational support, written in French by the same team of experts, covers all the NTS mentioned in the video and has already been used in a previous study (1)(5).
The 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios will be crisis scenarios in anesthesia promoting verbal orders and communication (including cardiac arrest, malignant hyperthermia...). They will serve as the evaluation basis. Each scenario will involve 2 to 3 learner participants (residents and/or nurse anesthetists). The first scenario will be followed by a debriefing focusing on technical skills, and the second scenario will be followed by a debriefing focusing on both technical and non-technical skills.
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR (1 correct event = 1 point) b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) (1 correct event = 1 point, partial = ½ point) c) Number of directive verbal orders (using a name or the pronoun "you") (1 correct event = 1 point) d) Number of correct medication dosages (medication with route of administration and dosage) (1 correct event = 1 point) This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts. This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts (1). It corresponds to an external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2). The number of verbal orders per scenario will also be counted by the 2 experts. A correct closed-loop communication is defined as completing the following 3 steps: 1° the sender formulates the order / 2° the receiver acknowledges receipt of the message / 3° the sender closes the loop by verifying the message is correctly received. The verbal order is only the first step when the sender formulates the order aloud.
The secondary endpoint will be to evaluate each item independently, the proportion of CLC per verbal order, satisfaction with the educational tool (Kirkpatrick level 1), and the perception of learning in terms of secure communication (rated between 1 to 10 on a Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 2). Participants' characteristics will also be collected via an online questionnaire right after the session.
- Conditions
- Simulation, Education, Communication
- Being tested
- Video group, Text group
- Keywords
- Communication, education, simulation, anesthesia, video
- Medical subject headings
- Communication
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Video groupOther
Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The educational video used was developed by experts (in Human Factors and Obstetric Anesthesia) and validated by SFAR and CARO. It depicts poor use of NTS (including CLC) during a maternal cardiac arrest anesthesia scenario and then proper use of NTS during the same scenario.
Text groupOther
Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
The text-type educational support, written in French by the same team of experts, covers all the NTS mentioned in the video and has already been used in a previous study
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Video group | Experimental | Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The educational video used was developed by experts (in Human Factors and Obstetric Anesthesia) and validated by SFAR and CARO. It depicts poor use of NTS (including CLC) during a maternal cardiac arrest anesthesia scenario and then proper use of NTS during the same scenario. Receives: Other: Video group |
| Text group | Active comparator | Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
The text-type educational support, written in French by the same team of experts, covers all the NTS mentioned in the video and has already been used in a previous study Receives: Other: Text group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
communication events
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR (1 correct event = 1 point) b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) (1 correct event = 1 point, partial = ½ point) c) Number of directive verbal orders (using a name or the pronoun "you") (1 correct event = 1 point) d) Number of correct medication dosages (medication with route of administration and dosage) (1 correct event = 1 point). This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts. This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts (1). It corresponds to an external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2).
Measured: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
Secondary outcomes (7)
Satisfaction
to evaluate satisfaction with the educational tool ((rated between 1 to 10 on a Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 1)
Measured: 1 minute and the end of the session by all residents
perception of learning
the perception of learning in terms of secure communication (rated between 1 to 10 on a Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 2).
Measured: 1 minute and the end of the session by all residents
Closed-loop-communication
to evaluate the proportion of Closed loop communication per verbal order.
Measured: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommandation) tool
to evaluate Number of correctly performed SBAR tool (1 correct event = 1 point)
Measured: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
closed-loop communication
to evaluate Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications ( correct event = 1 point, partial = ½ point)
Measured: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
verbal orders
to evaluate Number of directive verbal orders (using a name or the pronoun "you") (1 correct event = 1 point)
Measured: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
medication dosages
- Number of correct medication dosages (medication with route of administration and dosage) (1 correct event = 1 point).
Measured: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Jun 2024
- Study start26 Jun 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Jul 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Aug 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for SimulationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Parallel assignment, blinded, randomized study
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Université Paris-Sud
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Antonia Blanié, MD PhD, Principal investigator, Université Paris-Saclay
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06473090
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LabForSims-007
- Status last verified
- Jun 2024
- First submitted
- 12 Jun 2024
- Last updated
- 25 Jun 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Jun 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of Using a Video vs. Text to Improve Learning of Secure Communication During a Crisis in Anesthesia: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study in Simulation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06473090
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LabForSims-007
- Conditions
- Simulation, Education, Communication
- Keywords
- Communication, education, simulation, anesthesia, video
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Université Paris-SudUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 26 Jun 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jul 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Aug 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 25 Jun 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care. Secure and standardized communication involves clear, concise, and unambiguous language. Methods of secure communication include closed-loop communication (CLC), precise and complete communication (direct, full dosage), and the use of the SBAR tool. To improve healthcare professionals' communication, it is essential to use effective educational tools. Traditionally, lectures or reading articles were the standard methods. The use of video as a tool for knowledge and skills transfer seems promising. The objective is to compare the learning of secure communication in crisis situations in anesthesia after using two different educational supports: a text versus an educational video.
A prospective, multicenter, controlled, and randomized study will be conducted during high-fidelity simulation sessions in anesthesia, comparing a group using a text-type educational support versus a group using an educational video. It will take place in simulation centers. Voluntary participants will be anesthesia and critical care residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios. After their consent, participants will be randomized into two groups:
- Text group: Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
- Video group: Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) c) Number of directive verbal orders d) Number of correct medication dosages. This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts (external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2). This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts. The number of verbal orders per scenario will also be recorded.
The secondary endpoint will be to evaluate each item independently, the proportion of CLC per verbal order, satisfaction with the educational tool (Kirkpatrick level 1), and the perception of learning in terms of secure communication (1 to 10 Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 2). Participants' characteristics will also be collected.
Detailed description
Introduction Effective resolution of a crisis situation in anesthesia and critical care requires both technical and non-technical skills (1). Non-technical skills (NTS) include leadership, task distribution, teamwork, and communication. Moreover, communication issues are common in the operating room (2). Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (3). Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care (to reduce morbidity and mortality and limit the incidence of adverse events) (1). Secure and standardized communication involves clear, concise, and unambiguous language. Methods of secure communication include closed-loop communication (CLC), precise and complete communication (direct, full dosage), and the use of the SBAR tool (1).
To improve healthcare professionals' communication, it is essential to use effective educational tools. Traditionally, lectures or reading articles were the standard methods. More recently, simulation has shown its value in acquiring these skills (1)(4). However, given the large number of professionals and the limited number of trainers, other educational tools must be developed to allow training for as many professionals as possible.
The use of video as a tool for knowledge and skills transfer seems promising. Nowadays, many teenagers and adults regularly watch videos on digital platforms. Animated images offer many advantages over text. Research in psychology shows that 93% of human communication is non-verbal (5). Additionally, the human brain deciphers different elements of an image simultaneously, whereas spoken or written language is decoded linearly and sequentially, which takes more time (5). Consequently, the use of images for knowledge transfer would be particularly relevant as learning is more effective when visual, oral, or written information is provided simultaneously rather than sequentially (5). In the healthcare field, using images related to written or spoken text has proven particularly effective for knowledge transmission (6). Illustrated text allows participants to develop more complex cognitive structures than those who do not benefit from images (7).
Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the learning of secure communication in crisis situations in anesthesia after using two different educational supports: a text versus an educational video.
Materials and Methods A prospective, multicenter, controlled, and randomized study will be conducted during high-fidelity simulation sessions in anesthesia, comparing a group using a text-type educational support versus a group using an educational video. It will take place in simulation centers. Voluntary participants will be anesthesia residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios.
After their consent, participants will be randomized into two groups:
- Text group: Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
- Video group: Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The educational video used was developed by experts (in Human Factors and Obstetric Anesthesia) and validated by SFAR and CARO. It depicts poor use of NTS (including CLC) during a maternal cardiac arrest anesthesia scenario and then proper use of NTS during the same scenario. The text-type educational support, written in French by the same team of experts, covers all the NTS mentioned in the video and has already been used in a previous study (1)(5).
The 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios will be crisis scenarios in anesthesia promoting verbal orders and communication (including cardiac arrest, malignant hyperthermia...). They will serve as the evaluation basis. Each scenario will involve 2 to 3 learner participants (residents and/or nurse anesthetists). The first scenario will be followed by a debriefing focusing on technical skills, and the second scenario will be followed by a debriefing focusing on both technical and non-technical skills.
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR (1 correct event = 1 point) b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) (1 correct event = 1 point, partial = ½ point) c) Number of directive verbal orders (using a name or the pronoun "you") (1 correct event = 1 point) d) Number of correct medication dosages (medication with route of administration and dosage) (1 correct event = 1 point) This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts. This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts (1). It corresponds to an external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2). The number of verbal orders per scenario will also be counted by the 2 experts. A correct closed-loop communication is defined as completing the following 3 steps: 1° the sender formulates the order / 2° the receiver acknowledges receipt of the message / 3° the sender closes the loop by verifying the message is correctly received. The verbal order is only the first step when the sender formulates the order aloud.
The secondary endpoint will be to evaluate each item independently, the proportion of CLC per verbal order, satisfaction with the educational tool (Kirkpatrick level 1), and the perception of learning in terms of secure communication (rated between 1 to 10 on a Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 2). Participants' characteristics will also be collected via an online questionnaire right after the session.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Parallel assignment, blinded, randomized study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Video group | Experimental | Other: Video groupParticipants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios. The educational video used was developed by experts (in Human Factors and Obstetric Anesthesia) and validated by SFAR and CARO. It depicts poor use of NTS (including CLC) during a maternal cardiac arrest anesthesia scenario and then proper use of NTS during the same scenario. |
| Text group | Active comparator | Other: Text groupParticipants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios. The text-type educational support, written in French by the same team of experts, covers all the NTS mentioned in the video and has already been used in a previous study |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- anesthesia residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- technical problem video
- declines active participation in the session
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Video groupParticipants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios. The educational video used was developed by experts (in Human Factors and Obstetric Anesthesia) and validated by SFAR and CARO. It depicts poor use of NTS (including CLC) during a maternal cardiac arrest anesthesia scenario and then proper use of NTS during the same scenario. | Other | Video group |
| Text groupParticipants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios. The text-type educational support, written in French by the same team of experts, covers all the NTS mentioned in the video and has already been used in a previous study | Other | Text group |
Primary outcome
communication events
Time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR (1 correct event = 1 point) b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) (1 correct event = 1 point, partial = ½ point) c) Number of directive verbal orders (using a name or the pronoun "you") (1 correct event = 1 point) d) Number of correct medication dosages (medication with route of administration and dosage) (1 correct event = 1 point). This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts. This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts (1). It corresponds to an external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2).
7 secondary outcomes
Satisfaction
Time frame: 1 minute and the end of the session by all residents
perception of learning
Time frame: 1 minute and the end of the session by all residents
Closed-loop-communication
Time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommandation) tool
Time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
closed-loop communication
Time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
verbal orders
Time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
medication dosages
Time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Jun 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Simulation
Not yet recruiting
Culturally-Tailored AI Chatbot Simulation for Therapeutic Communication and Empathy in Psychiatric Nursing Students
Therapeutic Communication
Recruiting
The Effect of Web-Based Simulation and Flipped Learning on Blood Pressure Education
Education, Education Nursing
RecruitingPhase 2
REGULUS: MRI-guided Adaptive SABR for Liver Cancers
Liver Cancer, Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
Not yet recruiting
AI Smart Glasses Feedback for Intubation Training in Medical Students
Intubation, Intratracheal, Medical Education
Not yet recruiting
Generative AI and Gamified Simulation-Based Train-the-Trainer Basic Life Support Training for High School Teachers in Vietnam
Cardiac Arrest, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Fabien Marquion contact
Antonia Blanié, MD PhD principal investigator
Université Paris-Saclay
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Video group and Text group in people with Simulation and Education, run by Université Paris-Sud.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jun 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Antonia Blanié, MD PhD (33 145 21 34 47, antonia.blanie@aphp.fr), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
communication events (time frame: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Jun 2024.