Medical EducationCVCNCT06947733
Analysis of the Effect of Pre-course Videos on Improving Clinical Skills in Emergency Ultrasound Training
A study testing pre-class videos and no pre-class videos in people with Medical Education, run by Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan at 1 site in Taiwan.
Trial summary
Project Background Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) has become an important part of medical education in recent years. However, due to limited resources of ultrasound machines and clinical instructors, hands-on practice opportunities are limited, affecting the quality of teaching. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Medical Education
- What is being tested?
- pre-class videos and no pre-class videos
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 72 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTaiwan
- Study dates
- 18 Jul 2024to 1 Jul 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
- PGY physicians
- Medical students
Who cannot join
- who refused the invitation of this learning project
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Project Background Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) has become an important part of medical education in recent years. However, due to limited resources of ultrasound machines and clinical instructors, hands-on practice opportunities are limited, affecting the quality of teaching. Effectively imparting ultrasound operation skills has become a major challenge in improving training quality. This project aims to evaluate the impact of pre-class videos on enhancing ultrasound teaching effectiveness, particularly comparing videos shot with a first-person perspective (POV) to those shot with a face-to-face perspective.
Project Objectives Primary Objective: To evaluate the impact of learning from pre-class videos on enhancing the effectiveness of ultrasound teaching.
Read more
Secondary Objective: To investigate the effect of different filming techniques (POV versus face-to-face) on learning outcomes.
Research Design The study will adopt a parallel research design, with subjects randomly assigned to one of three groups: the first-person perspective video group, the face-to-face perspective video group, and the control group (who will not watch any videos).
Procedure on the Day of Instruction Complete a basic information and learning experience questionnaire. Conduct a pre-test practical, recording the operation of the ultrasound. Provide one-on-one instruction, offering detailed operational guidance. Conduct a post-test practical, allowing students to independently perform ultrasound-guided central venous catheter insertion.
Complete a post-test questionnaire. Expected Outcomes This study anticipates that learning through pre-class videos will effectively enhance students' ultrasound operation skills and improve teaching quality. Teaching videos shot with a POV may provide a more realistic learning experience, thereby enhancing students' learning outcomes. By comparing different filming techniques, this project will provide empirical data that can inform future ultrasound teaching methods, ultimately improving the overall effectiveness of medical education.
Read the detailed description
Study Population Participants included PGY physicians at the hospital, the majority of whom had not previously performed independent CVC insertion or used ultrasound guidance. A total of 72 PGY physicians voluntarily enrolled in the study after receiving invitations via email and posters. No adverse events were reported during the study.
Video Preparation
Instructional videos were recorded in two formats:
First-person POV video using a GoPro mounted on the instructor's head.
Face-to-face (FtF) side-view video using two strategically placed cameras to capture side and front views simultaneously.
Both videos were standardized to 25 minutes and 42 seconds in duration and were uploaded privately on YouTube. Access was restricted to registered participant emails and granted three days prior to training. A cartoon character inserted at the end of each video served as a verification checkpoint during pre-class surveys.
Interventions
Participants were randomized into one of three groups using a block randomization method:
POV first-person video group
Face-to-face side-view video group
Control group (no video)
All participants received a pre-class email. The video groups received access to their assigned instructional video and the CVC checklist, while the control group received only the checklist.
Training Day Procedure
Participants first completed a pre-training questionnaire assessing demographics, procedural experience, and video viewing compliance. This was followed by:
Pre-training assessment: Participants performed ultrasound-guided CVC on a phantom model, evaluated by a competency checklist and global rating score.
One-on-one instruction: Instructors provided standardized guidance.
Post-training assessment: Participants repeated the CVC procedure independently and were re-evaluated.
Post-training questionnaire: Included self-assessed confidence and satisfaction scores.
All assessments were performed by a single instructor who was blinded to group allocation.
Statistical Analysis
Continuous variables were reported as medians with interquartile ranges, and categorical variables as counts and percentages. Normality was assessed, and non-parametric tests were used due to skewed data. Between-group comparisons were performed using:
Kruskal-Wallis test (three-group comparison)
Mann-Whitney U test (two-group comparison)
Wilcoxon signed-rank test (paired pre/post comparison)
Chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used for categorical data. A significance threshold of α = 0.05 was used, with Bonferroni correction applied (adjusted α = 0.0167). Analyses were conducted in Python (version 3.13).
- Conditions
- Medical Education
- Being tested
- pre-class videos, no pre-class videos
- Keywords
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
pre-class videosBehavioural
This project aims to evaluate the impact of pre-class videos on enhancing ultrasound teaching effectiveness, particularly comparing videos shot with a first-person perspective (POV) to those shot with a face-to-face perspective.
no pre-class videosBehavioural
the control group (who will not watch any videos)
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| the first-person perspective video group | Active comparator | Students will watch first-person point-of-view (POV) filmed videos and will complete both pre- and post-tests on the day of the course. Receives: Behavioral: pre-class videos |
| the face-to-face perspective video group | Active comparator | Students will watch the face-to-face perspective filmed videos and will complete both pre- and post-tests on the day of the course. Receives: Behavioral: pre-class videos |
| the control group (who will not watch any videos) | Placebo comparator | A control group without video viewing will also complete both pre- and post-tests on the day of the course. Receives: Behavioral: no pre-class videos |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Checklist Completion Score (0-34 points)
Objective evaluation of procedural steps during central venous catheterization, assessed using a standardized skills checklist.
Measured: 6 months
Global Rating Score (1-10 scale)
Instructor-assigned score reflecting overall procedural fluency and technical competence.
Measured: 6 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Procedural Time (minutes)
Total time taken to complete the procedure during pre- and post-training assessments. Comparisons will be made between: Participants who received pre-class videos vs. those who did not (pre-test comparison)
Measured: 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Apr 2025
- Study start18 Jul 2024
- Primary completion31 May 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Jul 2025 (estimated)
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 Medical EducationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Taipei Veterans General Hospital, TaiwanThe 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
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Po-Hsiang Liao, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan
- Investigators
- Po-Hsiang Liao, MD, Principal investigator, Department of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06947733
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024 - 06 - 006B
- Acronym
- CVC
- Status last verified
- Apr 2025
- First submitted
- 8 Aug 2024
- Last updated
- 27 Apr 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: However, researchers interested in accessing de-identified data related to this study can contact us via email after the paper is published. We will consider requests on a case-by-case basis.
Publications
Liao PH, Chen CT, Lee YT, Lee CH, How CK, Huang HH, Hsu TF. Educational benefits of pre-class videos and viewing perspectives on ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization training: a prospective randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2026 Feb 27;26(1):551. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-08870-z.
PubMed 41749190
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Apr 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Analysis of the Effect of Pre-course Videos on Improving Clinical Skills in Emergency Ultrasound Training
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06947733
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CVC / 2024 - 06 - 006B
- Conditions
- Medical Education
- Keywords
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Enrolling by invitation
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Taipei Veterans General Hospital, TaiwanOther government
- Study start
- 18 Jul 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 May 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Jul 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 27 Apr 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.
Project Background Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) has become an important part of medical education in recent years. However, due to limited resources of ultrasound machines and clinical instructors, hands-on practice opportunities are limited, affecting the quality of teaching. Effectively imparting ultrasound operation skills has become a major challenge in improving training quality. This project aims to evaluate the impact of pre-class videos on enhancing ultrasound teaching effectiveness, particularly comparing videos shot with a first-person perspective (POV) to those shot with a face-to-face perspective.
Project Objectives Primary Objective: To evaluate the impact of learning from pre-class videos on enhancing the effectiveness of ultrasound teaching.
Secondary Objective: To investigate the effect of different filming techniques (POV versus face-to-face) on learning outcomes.
Research Design The study will adopt a parallel research design, with subjects randomly assigned to one of three groups: the first-person perspective video group, the face-to-face perspective video group, and the control group (who will not watch any videos).
Procedure on the Day of Instruction Complete a basic information and learning experience questionnaire. Conduct a pre-test practical, recording the operation of the ultrasound. Provide one-on-one instruction, offering detailed operational guidance. Conduct a post-test practical, allowing students to independently perform ultrasound-guided central venous catheter insertion.
Complete a post-test questionnaire. Expected Outcomes This study anticipates that learning through pre-class videos will effectively enhance students' ultrasound operation skills and improve teaching quality. Teaching videos shot with a POV may provide a more realistic learning experience, thereby enhancing students' learning outcomes. By comparing different filming techniques, this project will provide empirical data that can inform future ultrasound teaching methods, ultimately improving the overall effectiveness of medical education.
Detailed description
Study Population Participants included PGY physicians at the hospital, the majority of whom had not previously performed independent CVC insertion or used ultrasound guidance. A total of 72 PGY physicians voluntarily enrolled in the study after receiving invitations via email and posters. No adverse events were reported during the study.
Video Preparation
Instructional videos were recorded in two formats:
First-person POV video using a GoPro mounted on the instructor's head.
Face-to-face (FtF) side-view video using two strategically placed cameras to capture side and front views simultaneously.
Both videos were standardized to 25 minutes and 42 seconds in duration and were uploaded privately on YouTube. Access was restricted to registered participant emails and granted three days prior to training. A cartoon character inserted at the end of each video served as a verification checkpoint during pre-class surveys.
Interventions
Participants were randomized into one of three groups using a block randomization method:
POV first-person video group
Face-to-face side-view video group
Control group (no video)
All participants received a pre-class email. The video groups received access to their assigned instructional video and the CVC checklist, while the control group received only the checklist.
Training Day Procedure
Participants first completed a pre-training questionnaire assessing demographics, procedural experience, and video viewing compliance. This was followed by:
Pre-training assessment: Participants performed ultrasound-guided CVC on a phantom model, evaluated by a competency checklist and global rating score.
One-on-one instruction: Instructors provided standardized guidance.
Post-training assessment: Participants repeated the CVC procedure independently and were re-evaluated.
Post-training questionnaire: Included self-assessed confidence and satisfaction scores.
All assessments were performed by a single instructor who was blinded to group allocation.
Statistical Analysis
Continuous variables were reported as medians with interquartile ranges, and categorical variables as counts and percentages. Normality was assessed, and non-parametric tests were used due to skewed data. Between-group comparisons were performed using:
Kruskal-Wallis test (three-group comparison)
Mann-Whitney U test (two-group comparison)
Wilcoxon signed-rank test (paired pre/post comparison)
Chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used for categorical data. A significance threshold of α = 0.05 was used, with Bonferroni correction applied (adjusted α = 0.0167). Analyses were conducted in Python (version 3.13).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| the first-person perspective video group | Active comparator | Behavioral: pre-class videosStudents will watch first-person point-of-view (POV) filmed videos and will complete both pre- and post-tests on the day of the course. |
| the face-to-face perspective video group | Active comparator | Behavioral: pre-class videosStudents will watch the face-to-face perspective filmed videos and will complete both pre- and post-tests on the day of the course. |
| the control group (who will not watch any videos) | Placebo comparator | Behavioral: no pre-class videosA control group without video viewing will also complete both pre- and post-tests on the day of the course. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- PGY physicians
- Medical students
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- who refused the invitation of this learning project
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 |
|---|---|---|
| pre-class videosThis project aims to evaluate the impact of pre-class videos on enhancing ultrasound teaching effectiveness, particularly comparing videos shot with a first-person perspective (POV) to those shot with a face-to-face perspective. | Behavioural | the face-to-face perspective video group, the first-person perspective video group |
| no pre-class videosthe control group (who will not watch any videos) | Behavioural | the control group (who will not watch any videos) |
Primary outcome
Checklist Completion Score (0-34 points)
Time frame: 6 months
Objective evaluation of procedural steps during central venous catheterization, assessed using a standardized skills checklist.
Global Rating Score (1-10 scale)
Time frame: 6 months
Instructor-assigned score reflecting overall procedural fluency and technical competence.
1 secondary outcome
Procedural Time (minutes)
Time frame: 6 months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Apr 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41749190Liao PH, Chen CT, Lee YT, Lee CH, How CK, Huang HH, Hsu TF. Educational benefits of pre-class videos and viewing perspectives on ultrasound-guided central venous catheterization training: a prospective randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2026 Feb 27;26(1):551. doi: 10.1186/s12909-026-08870-z.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. However, researchers interested in accessing de-identified data related to this study can contact us via email after the paper is published. We will consider requests on a case-by-case basis.
Related trials for Medical Education
Not yet recruiting
AI Smart Glasses Feedback for Intubation Training in Medical Students
Intubation, Intratracheal, Medical Education
Recruiting
Linking Education, Produce Provision, and Community Referrals to Improve Diabetes Care (LINK)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Nutrition Poor
Not yet recruiting
Title of Study: Anesthesiologists' Learning Curves for Ultrasound Assessment of Difficult Airway
Airway Ultrasound, Difficult Airway Management
Not yet recruiting
Comparing the Efficacy of a Conversational Agent (QuitBot) Versus Standard Health Education on Smoking Cessation Among Medical Students in Cairo University
Conversational Agent, Smoking Cessation
Not yet recruiting
Generative AI-Assisted Personalized Feedback for Laparoscopic Skill Learning in Medical Undergraduates
Medical Education
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.
Po-Hsiang Liao, MD principal investigator
Department of Emergency Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing pre-class videos and no pre-class videos in people with Medical Education, run by Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan at 1 site in Taiwan.
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 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: enrolling by invitation, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Apr 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 Taiwan. 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Checklist Completion Score (0-34 points) (time frame: 6 months). The study lists 2 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 NCT06947733, 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 27 Apr 2025.