eFastPOCUS TTNCT06824675
Point-of-care Ultrasound Teledidactic Teaching for Prehospital Emergency Personnel
A study testing Teledidactic Training and In-Person Hands-on Training in people with eFast and Fate, run by Medical University of Vienna at 1 site in Austria.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare two methods of teaching emergency medical service (EMS) providers how to use point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) to quickly assess critical conditions like internal bleedings. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- eFast, Fate, Education, Medical
- What is being tested?
- Teledidactic Training and In-Person Hands-on Training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 90 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustria
- Study dates
- 23 Feb 2025to 8 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 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- EMT-Intermediate/Advanced in the Austrian or Hungarian EMS
- ≥18 years
Who cannot join
- Experienced POCUS examiners, defined as >20 real-life or simulated POCUS examinations following the eFAST protocol
- inadequate knowledge of English
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare two methods of teaching emergency medical service (EMS) providers how to use point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) to quickly assess critical conditions like internal bleedings. The main questions it aims to answer are:
Is teledidactic training as effective as face-to-face training in teaching POCUS skills? What are the participants' experiences, cognitive load, and feedback regarding these training methods? Researchers will compare remote, online hands-on training (teledidactic training) to traditional, face-to-face hands-on training (in-person training) to see if remote training is equally effective.
Read more
Participants will:
Be EMS providers from Austria and Hungary, aged 18 years or older, with no extensive prior experience in POCUS.
Be randomly assigned to either the tele-didactic or in-person training group (50 participants per group).
Undergo training sessions designed to teach POCUS skills and provide feedback on their learning experience.
This study is part of the European Union-funded Digi4Care project, which aims to promote digitalization in healthcare. It is significant because, if remote training proves effective, it could provide high-quality education to EMS providers in rural or underserved areas, ensuring they have the necessary skills to assess and respond to critical conditions.
Read the detailed description
POCUS is a valuable tool that helps EMS providers quickly assess critical conditions like internal bleeding or heart problems, which can be crucial in emergency situations. However, many rural and remote areas with limited infrastructure face challenges, such as restricted access to hands-on training and specialized instructors. This study aims to compare two educational approaches - teledidactic versus traditional in-person hands-on training - for teaching EMS providers the skills necessary to perform POCUS based on the eFAST protocol.
In this study participants will be devided into the intervention group (teledidactic training) and the control group (in-person training)
- Teledidactic Training: This involves remote, online hands-on training.
- In-Person Training: This is the traditional face-to-face hands-on training. Participants in this study are EMS providers from Austria and Hungary who are at least 18 years old and do not have extensive prior experience with POCUS. A total of 100 participants will be randomly assigned to either the teledidactic or in-person training group.
The primary objective of the study is to compare the effectiveness of teledidactic versus in-person training in teaching POCUS skills. Secondary objectives include evaluating participants' experiences with these teaching methods, their cognitive load during the learning process, and their feedback on the training methods.
This study is important because it seeks to determine if remote training can be as effective as in-person training. If successful, this could help provide high-quality education to EMS providers in rural or underserved areas, ensuring they have the necessary skills to quickly assess and respond to critical conditions. The study is part of the European Union-funded Digi4Care project, which aims to promote digitalization in healthcare.
All collected data will be securely stored and anonymized to protect participants' privacy. The study follows ethical guidelines to ensure participants' rights and safety. Participation is voluntary, and participants can withdraw at any time.
- Conditions
- eFast, Fate, Education, Medical, Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS)
- Being tested
- Teledidactic Training, In-Person Hands-on Training
- Keywords
- EMS Personell, Education, Medical Education, critical care, emergency, Ultrasound, POCUS, Anaesthesiology, emergency medical technician, point-of-care ultrasound
- Medical subject headings
- Emergencies
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Teledidactic TrainingOther
Participants will take part in a tele-didactic training session, matching the duration of the control group's training. This workshop will cover the same content as the control group's session, but instead of in-person instruction, teaching experts will deliver the training remotely using telemedicine software.
In-Person Hands-on TrainingOther
Participants will attend a face-to-face, hands-on workshop led by experts to learn the eFAST protocol.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Teledidactic Training | Other | Remote, online hands-on training Receives: Other: Teledidactic Training |
| In-Person Hands-on Training | Other | Traditional face-to-face hands on-training Receives: Other: In-Person Hands-on Training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Difference in the performance of an eFAST POCUS examination between randomized groups
The primary outcome measure is the difference in the total Objective Structured Assessment of Ultrasound Skill (OSAUS) score between the participants' of the two groups. Possible assessment scores range from 7 to 37 points, with higher scores indicating better performance.
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Secondary outcomes (6)
Difference in OSAUS score for each objective between randomized groups
The evaluation of different objectives within the two intervention groups using the respective OSAUS score for each individual objective. Objectives: indication for the examination; applied knowledge of ultrasound equipment; image optimization; systematic examination, interpretation of images, documentation of examination, medical decision making.
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Difference in time taken to demonstrate all views as required by the assessment checklist
Evaluation of the time taken to demonstrate all required views listed on the checklist. Views: Right Upper Quadrant (Subphrenic space, right costodiaphragmatic recess, hepatorenal space, liver, right kidney); Left Upper Quadrant (Subphrenic space, left costodiaphragmatic recess, splenorenal recess, spleen, left kidney); Pelvic view (rectouterine such in females or rectovesical such in males); Cardiac View subcostal (4-chamber view); Lungs (left and right) (pleural sliding including M-Mode image, Presence or absence of B-Lines)
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Difference in cognitive load between randomized groups
Assessment of the cognitive load using the NASA Task load index for overall cognitive load and for each individual objective (mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, performance, effort, frustration)
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Difference in learning outcomes and training design using TEI between randomized groups
Compare learning outcomes and training design between randomized groups using the Training Evaluation Inventory (TEI). Learning outcomes include subjective fun, perceived usefulness, difficulty, knowledge growth, and attitudes toward the training. Training design elements such as problem-based learning, activation of prior knowledge, demonstration, application, and integration will also be assessed. These aspects will be measured with a 45-item inventory using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from "I do not agree" to "I agree very much," providing insights into the effectiveness of the training methods.
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Evaluation of participants' feedback on specific questions
Evaluation of participants' feedback on their learning experience using specific questions. Participants will rate, on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree), whether the e-learning course provided adequate knowledge for the subsequent hands-on training. Additionally, they will assess their confidence in performing and interpreting the eFAST protocol. For the intervention group only, participants will also indicate whether they would have preferred in-person training instead of the teledidactic and whether they found the software/hardware easy to use.
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Technical issues/usability
Assessment whether participants in the intervention group encountered issues with the software or hardware used for the teledidactic training.
Participants will indicate "yes" or "no" and, if they experienced issues, provide free-text explanations.
Measured: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Feb 2025
- Study start23 Feb 2025
- Primary completion8 May 2025
- Study completion8 May 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for eFastStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Medical University of ViennaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- The study consists of five phases. Participants begin by watching an introductory video and completing an electronic questionnaire to provide baseline information, including prior POCUS experience and openness to new methods. They are then randomly assigned to either the teledidactic (intervention) or in-person (control) training group. Next, all participants complete a standardized e-learning course covering POCUS basics and the eFAST protocol. This is followed by a supervised hands-on training session conducted either in person or remotely, based on group assignment. Participants are then evaluated during a simulated emergency case. They also complete a follow-up questionnaire on their cognitive load and learning experience. Finally, expert reviewers analyze video recordings of the assessments using the OSAUS scoring system to evaluate systematic examination skills and image interpretation accuracy
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 90 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of Vienna
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Semmelweis University Budapest, Ludwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Josef Michael Lintschinger, Medical University of Vienna
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06824675
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2107/2024
- Acronym
- POCUS TT
- Status last verified
- Feb 2025
- First submitted
- 7 Feb 2025
- Last updated
- 26 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Lintschinger JM, Degischer B, Dronigi L, Bolnberger A, Erdos B, Kaider A, Klaus DA, Magnet I, Constantinovits M, Vadas V, Tiboldi A, Hafner C. Point-of-care ultrasound tele-didactic teaching for prehospital emergency personnel (POCUS TT study): a randomized non-inferiority trial. BMC Med Educ. 2026 Jul 1. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-09783-7. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42387530
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Point-of-care Ultrasound Teledidactic Teaching for Prehospital Emergency Personnel
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06824675
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- POCUS TT / 2107/2024
- Conditions
- eFast, Fate, Education, Medical, Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS)
- Keywords
- EMS Personell, Education, Medical Education, critical care, emergency, Ultrasound, POCUS, Anaesthesiology
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 90 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of ViennaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Semmelweis University Budapest, Ludwig Boltzmann Institute Digital Health and Patient Safety
- Study start
- 23 Feb 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 8 May 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 8 May 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Feb 2025 (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 goal of this clinical trial is to compare two methods of teaching emergency medical service (EMS) providers how to use point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) to quickly assess critical conditions like internal bleedings. The main questions it aims to answer are:
Is teledidactic training as effective as face-to-face training in teaching POCUS skills? What are the participants' experiences, cognitive load, and feedback regarding these training methods? Researchers will compare remote, online hands-on training (teledidactic training) to traditional, face-to-face hands-on training (in-person training) to see if remote training is equally effective.
Participants will:
Be EMS providers from Austria and Hungary, aged 18 years or older, with no extensive prior experience in POCUS.
Be randomly assigned to either the tele-didactic or in-person training group (50 participants per group).
Undergo training sessions designed to teach POCUS skills and provide feedback on their learning experience.
This study is part of the European Union-funded Digi4Care project, which aims to promote digitalization in healthcare. It is significant because, if remote training proves effective, it could provide high-quality education to EMS providers in rural or underserved areas, ensuring they have the necessary skills to assess and respond to critical conditions.
Detailed description
POCUS is a valuable tool that helps EMS providers quickly assess critical conditions like internal bleeding or heart problems, which can be crucial in emergency situations. However, many rural and remote areas with limited infrastructure face challenges, such as restricted access to hands-on training and specialized instructors. This study aims to compare two educational approaches - teledidactic versus traditional in-person hands-on training - for teaching EMS providers the skills necessary to perform POCUS based on the eFAST protocol.
In this study participants will be devided into the intervention group (teledidactic training) and the control group (in-person training)
- Teledidactic Training: This involves remote, online hands-on training.
- In-Person Training: This is the traditional face-to-face hands-on training. Participants in this study are EMS providers from Austria and Hungary who are at least 18 years old and do not have extensive prior experience with POCUS. A total of 100 participants will be randomly assigned to either the teledidactic or in-person training group.
The primary objective of the study is to compare the effectiveness of teledidactic versus in-person training in teaching POCUS skills. Secondary objectives include evaluating participants' experiences with these teaching methods, their cognitive load during the learning process, and their feedback on the training methods.
This study is important because it seeks to determine if remote training can be as effective as in-person training. If successful, this could help provide high-quality education to EMS providers in rural or underserved areas, ensuring they have the necessary skills to quickly assess and respond to critical conditions. The study is part of the European Union-funded Digi4Care project, which aims to promote digitalization in healthcare.
All collected data will be securely stored and anonymized to protect participants' privacy. The study follows ethical guidelines to ensure participants' rights and safety. Participation is voluntary, and participants can withdraw at any time.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- The study consists of five phases. Participants begin by watching an introductory video and completing an electronic questionnaire to provide baseline information, including prior POCUS experience and openness to new methods. They are then randomly assigned to either the teledidactic (intervention) or in-person (control) training group. Next, all participants complete a standardized e-learning course covering POCUS basics and the eFAST protocol. This is followed by a supervised hands-on training session conducted either in person or remotely, based on group assignment. Participants are then evaluated during a simulated emergency case. They also complete a follow-up questionnaire on their cognitive load and learning experience. Finally, expert reviewers analyze video recordings of the assessments using the OSAUS scoring system to evaluate systematic examination skills and image interpretation accuracy
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Teledidactic Training | Other | Other: Teledidactic TrainingRemote, online hands-on training |
| In-Person Hands-on Training | Other | Other: In-Person Hands-on TrainingTraditional face-to-face hands on-training |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- EMT-Intermediate/Advanced in the Austrian or Hungarian EMS
- ≥18 years
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Experienced POCUS examiners, defined as >20 real-life or simulated POCUS examinations following the eFAST protocol
- inadequate knowledge of English
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Teledidactic TrainingParticipants will take part in a tele-didactic training session, matching the duration of the control group's training. This workshop will cover the same content as the control group's session, but instead of in-person instruction, teaching experts will deliver the training remotely using telemedicine software. | Other | Teledidactic Training |
| In-Person Hands-on TrainingParticipants will attend a face-to-face, hands-on workshop led by experts to learn the eFAST protocol. | Other | In-Person Hands-on Training |
Primary outcome
Difference in the performance of an eFAST POCUS examination between randomized groups
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
The primary outcome measure is the difference in the total Objective Structured Assessment of Ultrasound Skill (OSAUS) score between the participants' of the two groups. Possible assessment scores range from 7 to 37 points, with higher scores indicating better performance.
6 secondary outcomes
Difference in OSAUS score for each objective between randomized groups
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Difference in time taken to demonstrate all views as required by the assessment checklist
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Difference in cognitive load between randomized groups
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Difference in learning outcomes and training design using TEI between randomized groups
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Evaluation of participants' feedback on specific questions
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
Technical issues/usability
Time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion
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 26 Sep 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42387530Lintschinger JM, Degischer B, Dronigi L, Bolnberger A, Erdos B, Kaider A, Klaus DA, Magnet I, Constantinovits M, Vadas V, Tiboldi A, Hafner C. Point-of-care ultrasound tele-didactic teaching for prehospital emergency personnel (POCUS TT study): a randomized non-inferiority trial. BMC Med Educ. 2026 Jul 1. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-09783-7. Online ahead of print.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for eFast
Not yet recruiting
Remote Guidance for eFAST Training Using a Head-Mounted Device
Clinical Competence, Ultrasonography
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 Teledidactic Training and In-Person Hands-on Training in people with eFast and Fate, run by Medical University of Vienna at 1 site in Austria.
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 2 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Sep 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 Austria. 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?
Difference in the performance of an eFAST POCUS examination between randomized groups (time frame: evaluation within 3 weeks after study completion). 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 NCT06824675, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 26 Sep 2025.