HealthyNCT06549998
High-Fidelity Patient Simulation on Clinical Reasoning Skills and Interprofessional Competencies
A study testing Interprofessional Simulation Experience in people with Healthy, run by Youngstown State University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The proposed study is looking to examine the effects of High-Fidelity Patient Simulation (HFPS) on clinical reasoning skills and interprofessional competencies in Physical Therapy and Nursing students. The proposed study will have two objectives: 1. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 100 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Interprofessional Simulation Experience
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 26 Aug 2024to 17 May 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 to 100 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Must be a student currently enrolled in either the physical therapy or nursing program
Who cannot join
- Not currently enrolled as a student in the physical therapy or nursing program
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effects of High-Fidelity Patient Simulation on Clinical Reasoning Skills and Interprofessional Competencies in Physical Therapy and Nursing Students
The proposed study is looking to examine the effects of High-Fidelity Patient Simulation (HFPS) on clinical reasoning skills and interprofessional competencies in Physical Therapy and Nursing students.
The proposed study will have two objectives:
Read more
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student performance related to clinical reasoning skills during simulated clinical situations.
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student self-reported changes in team work and communication based on the IPEC core competencies
Researchers will compare students who do not receive a simulation (Group C) to those who receive two simulations (Group E).
Participants will:
- Be assigned to one of 2 groups (Group C, Group E)
- Based on group assignment receive no simulation or 2 simulations
- Each group will be assessed at the end for their inter-professional attitudes and clinical reasoning skills
Read the detailed description
Background Information Patient-centered care is important in helping individuals who live with multiple health conditions, requiring collaboration among healthcare professionals of different disciplines. Interprofessional collaborative practice has been defined by the World Health Organization as "multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds working together with patients, families, caregivers, and communities to deliver the highest quality of care". It is difficult for any one healthcare professional to address the number and variety of healthcare problems, making collaboration an important part of healthcare. An ability to effectively collaborate among health care disciplines in the areas of communication, role identification, team working skills, and conflict resolution are critical components of practice for health care professionals. This has led to educational institutions placing a greater emphasis on the development and integration of interprofessional education (IPE) into health professions curricula. The emphasis of IPE is to prepare health professions students to work together with the aim of building a safe, patient-centered health care environment5.
Experiential learning provides learners an opportunity to practice skills and techniques learned in the classroom in a real-world or practical setting. The benefits of experiential learning have long been held in high regard and include enhancing understanding of content and improvement in interpersonal skills. Implementation of experiential learning varies significantly across PT curricula. Some experiential learning methods are time and labor intensive, while others are less so. Cost, feasibility, time constraints, and course outcomes play a role in determining which methods work best for a particular course or program. Simulation has been used for decades to assist with skill acquisition and assessment. High-fidelity human patient simulation (HFPS) with a focus on clinical situations/scenarios is highly conducive to IPE. The term "simulation" refers to an experiential educational technique which "creates a situation or environment to allow persons to experience a representation of a real event for the purpose of practice, learning, evaluation, testing, or to gain understanding of systems or human actions.". In health care simulation, high-fidelity refers to "simulation experiences that are extremely realistic and provide a high level of interactivity and realism for the learner".
The use of simulation as a teaching pedagogy can be especially valuable in replicating the acute care setting.
Statement of the Problem The Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) set forth a series of core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice. The IPEC describes these core competencies as: " to the safe, high-quality, accessible, patient-centered care and enhanced population health outcomes desired by all". These core competencies were developed in order to prepare students to engage in lifelong learning and collaboration to improve community health outcomes. These competencies include: Values and Ethics (work with team members to maintain a climate of shared values, ethical conduct, and mutual respect), Roles and Responsibilities (Use the knowledge of one's own role and team members' expertise to address health outcomes), Communication (Communicate in a responsive, responsible, respectful, and compassionate manner with team members.), Teams and Teamwork (Apply values and principles of team science to adapt one\'s own role in a variety of team settings).
The use of HFPS has been utilized in education settings involving physical therapy students. A recent review that examined the effect of HFPS learning in Acute Cardiorespiratory Physical Therapy noted that there is currently a lack of quality studies that have examined this area of study. Part of the quality involved the choice of research design and the lack of validated outcome measures to assess variables of interest. The review was unable to determine whether HFPS can improve physical therapists\' clinical performance and/or preparedness. In addition, many studies examine pre-post simulation when capturing outcome data, demonstrating a further need for longer longitudinal studies to further assess student performance. There is also reported variability in how HFPS is used, the optimal delivery, timing, volume, and content.
The proposed study will have two objectives:
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student performance related to clinical reasoning skills during simulated clinical situations.
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student self-reported changes in team work and communication based on the IPEC core competencies.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- Interprofessional Simulation Experience
- Keywords
- nursing, physical therapy, education, interprofessional, simulation, clinical reasoning
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Interprofessional Simulation ExperienceOther
Phase 1 (Pre-Brief): Nursing and physical therapy students will have 10 minutes to gather as a group and prepare for the simulation experience.
The students will work together to review the simulated patient's medical chart, which includes a hand off report, physician orders, patient demographic data, disci-pline-specific progress notes, a physical therapy evaluation, and information from lab results posted on a tri-fold board.
Phase 2 (Simulation): After reviewing the chart and establishing a plan as a group for getting the simulated patient out of bed, the interprofessional team of nursing and physical therapy students will enter the simulated hospital room. The goal for the approximately 20-minute encounter is for the interprofessional group to help the simulated patient to get out of bed while closely monitoring the physiological responses to activity.
Phase 3: The simulation will conclude with a 30-minute faculty guided and structured debriefing session.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | This group will not receive any simulation intervention |
| Experimental Group | Experimental | This group will receive 2 simulations Receives: Other: Interprofessional Simulation Experience |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Interprofessional Attitudes Scale (IPAS)
The tool measures 5 subscales that include: Teamwork roles and responsibilities, Patient centeredness, Interprofessional biases, Diversity and ethics, Community centeredness. The IPAS is based off of the 4 competencies for interprofessional education.
The tool is a 27 item 5-point agreement scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Internal consistency reliability for the sub-scales were good (i.e., Cronbach alpha = 0.62 to 0.92). Exploratory factor analysis revealed that items loaded sufficiently (i.e., loading greater than 0.30) on only one of five factors (i.e., did not cross-load). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the sub-scale structure, Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.86 and Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.90.
Measured: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)
Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR)
The rubric's 11 dimensions of student performance are grouped into 4 subscales (Noticing, Interpreting, Responding, and Reflecting), with clear performance descriptions for dimension scores between 1 (beginning) and 4 (exemplary), and LCJR totals between 11 and 44 points. The LCJR is considered a valid and reliable instrument with the Cronbach α for total scores between 0.80 and 0.97 and subscale results of 0.89 to 0.93. Although it has been mainly used in simulation, use of the LCJR in clinically focused studies has been successful with Manetti reporting reliability of 0.89.
Measured: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)
Performance Assessment Communication and Teamwork Tool Set (PACT)
The PACT tools are designed to provide assessment feedback for learners, and evaluation information for program faculty. For this study, only the expert observation rating tool will be used. The overall inter-rater reliability of the novice, expert, and video observational tools was good (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) = 0.85, 0.76, and 0.90, respectively). The inter-rater reliability for four of the five domains in the expert observational tool were acceptable (ICC = 0.44-0.66); the exception was the team structure domain (ICC = 0.21). The inter-rater reliability for all five domains in the video observational tool were acceptable (ICC = 0.54-0.84).
Measured: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted12 Aug 2024
- Study start26 Aug 2024
- Primary completion17 May 2025
- Study completion17 May 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies 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
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Youngstown State University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06549998
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-260
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 5 Aug 2024
- Last updated
- 16 Jul 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Nandan M, Scott PA. Interprofessional practice and education: holistic approaches to complex health care challenges. J Allied Health. 2014 Aug;43(3):150-6.
PubMed 25194061Nichols A, Wiley S, Morrell BL, Jochum JE, Moore ES, Carmack JN, Hetzler KE, Toon J, Hess JL, Meer M, Moore SM. Interprofessional Healthcare Students' Perceptions of a Simulation-Based Learning Experience. J Allied Health. 2019 Fall;48(3):159-166.
PubMed 31487353Bethea DP, Smith N, Allison LK, Bell CS, Collins ME, Migliarese SJ, Darby R. Live Standardized Patient Scenario Improves Attitudes Toward and Readiness for Interprofessional Education in Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy Students. J Allied Health. 2019 Summer;48(2):81-87.
PubMed 31167008Smith SN, Crocker AF. Experiential learning in physical therapy education. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017 Jun 28;8:427-433. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S140373. eCollection 2017.
PubMed 28721117Rossler KL, Kimble LP. Capturing readiness to learn and collaboration as explored with an interprofessional simulation scenario: A mixed-methods research study. Nurse Educ Today. 2016 Jan;36:348-53. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.08.018. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
PubMed 26363963Blaseg NA. Simulation-Based Interprofessional ICU Bedside Rounding Course. S D Med. 2022 Oct;75(10):449-450.
PubMed 36889260Coppola AC, Coppard BM, Qi Y. Impact of Participation in an Interprofessional Acute Care High-Fidelity Simulation for Occupational and Physical Therapy Graduate Students. J Allied Health. 2019 Winter;48(4):248-256.
PubMed 31800654Karnish K, Shustack L, Brogan L, Capitano G, Cunfer A. Interprofessional Socialization Through Acute-Care Simulation. Radiol Technol. 2019 Jul;90(6):552-562.
PubMed 31270256Shoemaker MJ, Riemersma L, Perkins R. Use of high fidelity human simulation to teach physical therapist decision-making skills for the intensive care setting. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2009 Mar;20(1):13-8.
PubMed 20467529Silberman NJ, Panzarella KJ, Melzer BA. Using human simulation to prepare physical therapy students for acute care clinical practice. J Allied Health. 2013 Spring;42(1):25-32.
PubMed 23471282Thomas EM, Rybski MF, Apke TL, Kegelmeyer DA, Kloos AD. An acute interprofessional simulation experience for occupational and physical therapy students: Key findings from a survey study. J Interprof Care. 2017 May;31(3):317-324. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2017.1280006. Epub 2017 Feb 28.
PubMed 28276844Wellmon R, Lefebvre KM, Ferry D. Effects of High-Fidelity Simulation on Physical Therapy and Nursing Students' Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Learning and Collaboration. J Nurs Educ. 2017 Aug 1;56(8):456-465. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20170712-03.
PubMed 28787067
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Jul 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of High-Fidelity Patient Simulation on Clinical Reasoning Skills and Interprofessional Competencies in Physical Therapy and Nursing Students
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06549998
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2024-260
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Keywords
- nursing, physical therapy, education, interprofessional, simulation, clinical reasoning
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Youngstown State UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 26 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 17 May 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 17 May 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 12 Aug 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.
The proposed study is looking to examine the effects of High-Fidelity Patient Simulation (HFPS) on clinical reasoning skills and interprofessional competencies in Physical Therapy and Nursing students.
The proposed study will have two objectives:
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student performance related to clinical reasoning skills during simulated clinical situations.
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student self-reported changes in team work and communication based on the IPEC core competencies
Researchers will compare students who do not receive a simulation (Group C) to those who receive two simulations (Group E).
Participants will:
- Be assigned to one of 2 groups (Group C, Group E)
- Based on group assignment receive no simulation or 2 simulations
- Each group will be assessed at the end for their inter-professional attitudes and clinical reasoning skills
Detailed description
Background Information Patient-centered care is important in helping individuals who live with multiple health conditions, requiring collaboration among healthcare professionals of different disciplines. Interprofessional collaborative practice has been defined by the World Health Organization as "multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds working together with patients, families, caregivers, and communities to deliver the highest quality of care". It is difficult for any one healthcare professional to address the number and variety of healthcare problems, making collaboration an important part of healthcare. An ability to effectively collaborate among health care disciplines in the areas of communication, role identification, team working skills, and conflict resolution are critical components of practice for health care professionals. This has led to educational institutions placing a greater emphasis on the development and integration of interprofessional education (IPE) into health professions curricula. The emphasis of IPE is to prepare health professions students to work together with the aim of building a safe, patient-centered health care environment5.
Experiential learning provides learners an opportunity to practice skills and techniques learned in the classroom in a real-world or practical setting. The benefits of experiential learning have long been held in high regard and include enhancing understanding of content and improvement in interpersonal skills. Implementation of experiential learning varies significantly across PT curricula. Some experiential learning methods are time and labor intensive, while others are less so. Cost, feasibility, time constraints, and course outcomes play a role in determining which methods work best for a particular course or program. Simulation has been used for decades to assist with skill acquisition and assessment. High-fidelity human patient simulation (HFPS) with a focus on clinical situations/scenarios is highly conducive to IPE. The term "simulation" refers to an experiential educational technique which "creates a situation or environment to allow persons to experience a representation of a real event for the purpose of practice, learning, evaluation, testing, or to gain understanding of systems or human actions.". In health care simulation, high-fidelity refers to "simulation experiences that are extremely realistic and provide a high level of interactivity and realism for the learner".
The use of simulation as a teaching pedagogy can be especially valuable in replicating the acute care setting.
Statement of the Problem The Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) set forth a series of core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice. The IPEC describes these core competencies as: " to the safe, high-quality, accessible, patient-centered care and enhanced population health outcomes desired by all". These core competencies were developed in order to prepare students to engage in lifelong learning and collaboration to improve community health outcomes. These competencies include: Values and Ethics (work with team members to maintain a climate of shared values, ethical conduct, and mutual respect), Roles and Responsibilities (Use the knowledge of one's own role and team members' expertise to address health outcomes), Communication (Communicate in a responsive, responsible, respectful, and compassionate manner with team members.), Teams and Teamwork (Apply values and principles of team science to adapt one\'s own role in a variety of team settings).
The use of HFPS has been utilized in education settings involving physical therapy students. A recent review that examined the effect of HFPS learning in Acute Cardiorespiratory Physical Therapy noted that there is currently a lack of quality studies that have examined this area of study. Part of the quality involved the choice of research design and the lack of validated outcome measures to assess variables of interest. The review was unable to determine whether HFPS can improve physical therapists\' clinical performance and/or preparedness. In addition, many studies examine pre-post simulation when capturing outcome data, demonstrating a further need for longer longitudinal studies to further assess student performance. There is also reported variability in how HFPS is used, the optimal delivery, timing, volume, and content.
The proposed study will have two objectives:
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student performance related to clinical reasoning skills during simulated clinical situations.
- Assess the use of HFPS and whether it has an effect of improving physical therapy and nursing student self-reported changes in team work and communication based on the IPEC core competencies.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | –This group will not receive any simulation intervention |
| Experimental Group | Experimental | Other: Interprofessional Simulation ExperienceThis group will receive 2 simulations |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 100 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Must be a student currently enrolled in either the physical therapy or nursing program
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Not currently enrolled as a student in the physical therapy or nursing program
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Interprofessional Simulation ExperiencePhase 1 (Pre-Brief): Nursing and physical therapy students will have 10 minutes to gather as a group and prepare for the simulation experience. The students will work together to review the simulated patient's medical chart, which includes a hand off report, physician orders, patient demographic data, disci-pline-specific progress notes, a physical therapy evaluation, and information from lab results posted on a tri-fold board. Phase 2 (Simulation): After reviewing the chart and establishing a plan as a group for getting the simulated patient out of bed, the interprofessional team of nursing and physical therapy students will enter the simulated hospital room. The goal for the approximately 20-minute encounter is for the interprofessional group to help the simulated patient to get out of bed while closely monitoring the physiological responses to activity. Phase 3: The simulation will conclude with a 30-minute faculty guided and structured debriefing session. | Other | Experimental Group |
Primary outcome
Interprofessional Attitudes Scale (IPAS)
Time frame: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)
The tool measures 5 subscales that include: Teamwork roles and responsibilities, Patient centeredness, Interprofessional biases, Diversity and ethics, Community centeredness. The IPAS is based off of the 4 competencies for interprofessional education. The tool is a 27 item 5-point agreement scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Internal consistency reliability for the sub-scales were good (i.e., Cronbach alpha = 0.62 to 0.92). Exploratory factor analysis revealed that items loaded sufficiently (i.e., loading greater than 0.30) on only one of five factors (i.e., did not cross-load). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the sub-scale structure, Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.86 and Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.90.
Lasater Clinical Judgment Rubric (LCJR)
Time frame: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)
The rubric's 11 dimensions of student performance are grouped into 4 subscales (Noticing, Interpreting, Responding, and Reflecting), with clear performance descriptions for dimension scores between 1 (beginning) and 4 (exemplary), and LCJR totals between 11 and 44 points. The LCJR is considered a valid and reliable instrument with the Cronbach α for total scores between 0.80 and 0.97 and subscale results of 0.89 to 0.93. Although it has been mainly used in simulation, use of the LCJR in clinically focused studies has been successful with Manetti reporting reliability of 0.89.
Performance Assessment Communication and Teamwork Tool Set (PACT)
Time frame: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)
The PACT tools are designed to provide assessment feedback for learners, and evaluation information for program faculty. For this study, only the expert observation rating tool will be used. The overall inter-rater reliability of the novice, expert, and video observational tools was good (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) = 0.85, 0.76, and 0.90, respectively). The inter-rater reliability for four of the five domains in the expert observational tool were acceptable (ICC = 0.44-0.66); the exception was the team structure domain (ICC = 0.21). The inter-rater reliability for all five domains in the video observational tool were acceptable (ICC = 0.54-0.84).
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 Jul 2025.
- Background: PubMed 25194061Nandan M, Scott PA. Interprofessional practice and education: holistic approaches to complex health care challenges. J Allied Health. 2014 Aug;43(3):150-6.
- Background: PubMed 31487353Nichols A, Wiley S, Morrell BL, Jochum JE, Moore ES, Carmack JN, Hetzler KE, Toon J, Hess JL, Meer M, Moore SM. Interprofessional Healthcare Students' Perceptions of a Simulation-Based Learning Experience. J Allied Health. 2019 Fall;48(3):159-166.
- Background: PubMed 31167008Bethea DP, Smith N, Allison LK, Bell CS, Collins ME, Migliarese SJ, Darby R. Live Standardized Patient Scenario Improves Attitudes Toward and Readiness for Interprofessional Education in Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy Students. J Allied Health. 2019 Summer;48(2):81-87.
- Background: PubMed 28721117Smith SN, Crocker AF. Experiential learning in physical therapy education. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017 Jun 28;8:427-433. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S140373. eCollection 2017.
- Background: PubMed 26363963Rossler KL, Kimble LP. Capturing readiness to learn and collaboration as explored with an interprofessional simulation scenario: A mixed-methods research study. Nurse Educ Today. 2016 Jan;36:348-53. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.08.018. Epub 2015 Sep 1.
- Background: PubMed 36889260Blaseg NA. Simulation-Based Interprofessional ICU Bedside Rounding Course. S D Med. 2022 Oct;75(10):449-450.
- Background: PubMed 31800654Coppola AC, Coppard BM, Qi Y. Impact of Participation in an Interprofessional Acute Care High-Fidelity Simulation for Occupational and Physical Therapy Graduate Students. J Allied Health. 2019 Winter;48(4):248-256.
- Background: PubMed 31270256Karnish K, Shustack L, Brogan L, Capitano G, Cunfer A. Interprofessional Socialization Through Acute-Care Simulation. Radiol Technol. 2019 Jul;90(6):552-562.
- Background: PubMed 20467529Shoemaker MJ, Riemersma L, Perkins R. Use of high fidelity human simulation to teach physical therapist decision-making skills for the intensive care setting. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2009 Mar;20(1):13-8.
- Background: PubMed 23471282Silberman NJ, Panzarella KJ, Melzer BA. Using human simulation to prepare physical therapy students for acute care clinical practice. J Allied Health. 2013 Spring;42(1):25-32.
- Background: PubMed 28276844Thomas EM, Rybski MF, Apke TL, Kegelmeyer DA, Kloos AD. An acute interprofessional simulation experience for occupational and physical therapy students: Key findings from a survey study. J Interprof Care. 2017 May;31(3):317-324. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2017.1280006. Epub 2017 Feb 28.
- Background: PubMed 28787067Wellmon R, Lefebvre KM, Ferry D. Effects of High-Fidelity Simulation on Physical Therapy and Nursing Students' Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Learning and Collaboration. J Nurs Educ. 2017 Aug 1;56(8):456-465. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20170712-03.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Interprofessional Simulation Experience in people with Healthy, run by Youngstown State University at 1 site in United States.
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 1 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Jul 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Interprofessional Attitudes Scale (IPAS) (time frame: baseline and through study completion (an average of 8 months)). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06549998, which also lists 12 linked publications.
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 16 Jul 2025.