Skill PerformanceNCT07358741
Standard Two-Day Advanced Life Support (ALS) Versus One Day Recertification Course
An observational study of Skill Performance and Knowledge, run by National Hepatology & Tropical Medicine Research Institute at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
this study aims to compare the effectiveness of a one-day versus two-day ALS recertification course in terms of knowledge retention, practical skills performance, participant satisfaction, and confidence. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Skill Performance, Knowledge
- How many people
- 158 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 12 Dec 2025to 30 Nov 2026
- How long will I take part?
- 90 Days
- Phase
- Observational
- 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
Study population: demographic data will be collected, including participants' age, sex, specialty, prior ALS course completion, participation in resuscitation teams, last CPR performance, and total online learning hours (minimum 16 hours for the standard ALS course and 8 hours for the recertification course).
Who may be able to join
- Adult healthcare professionals (≥18 years) requiring ALS recertification, including doctors, nurses, and paramedics, who can attend the assigned course and follow-up assessments.
Who cannot join
- Participants will be excluded if they cannot attend the assigned course or decline consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Eman Ibrahim El-Desoki Mahmoud, MD, intensive care medicine contact
Egypt1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Egyptian resuscitation council
Cairo
Eman prof., MD intensive care medicine, +201227409501, eman18350@gmail.com
Eman, eman18350@gmail.com
About this study
Official title: Balancing Time and Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study Comparing the Effectiveness of the Standard Two-Day Advanced Life Support (ALS) Versus One Day Recertification Course
this study aims to compare the effectiveness of a one-day versus two-day ALS recertification course in terms of knowledge retention, practical skills performance, participant satisfaction, and confidence.
Read the detailed description
demographic data will be collected, including participants' age, sex, specialty, prior ALS course completion, participation in resuscitation teams, last CPR performance, and total online learning hours (minimum 16 hours for the standard ALS course and 8 hours for the recertification course). All ALS courses (standard and recertification) will be conducted in accordance with the standardized curriculum, structure, and educational formats established by the European Resuscitation Council (ERC).
Assessments:
- Knowledge Assessment B. Practical Skills Performance C. Participant satisfaction and confidence at the end of each course
- Scoring: 0 = Not performed/incorrect, 1 = Partially/performed with prompting, 2 = Performed correctly and independently.
- Conditions
- Skill Performance, Knowledge
- Keywords
- Standard, recertification, ALS, ERC, knowledge retention
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| standard ALS course | Two day course | |
| Recertification Course | one day course |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
overall effectiveness between the two-day stanrdand one-day ALS recertification
- Baseline knowledge score
Measured: 24hours precourse
Practical skill effectiveness
- Standardized team-leader assessment station at the end of each course. Scoring: 0 = Not performed/incorrect, 1 = Partially/performed with prompting, 2 = Performed correctly and independently.
Measured: 48 and 24 hours from standard amd recertification course respectively
Knowledge retention assessment
post-course MCQ to evaluate decay; similar to pre-course MCQ
Measured: 3 months post course
Secondary outcomes (1)
Participant satisfaction e
scores about course structure, teaching quality, and learning materials; 1: Strongly disagree- 2:disagree- 3: moderate 4: agree- 5: Strongly agree
Measured: 48hours and 24 from standard and recertification course respectively
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Jan 2026
- Study start12 Dec 2025
- Primary completion30 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Nov 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Skill PerformanceStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 158 participants (estimated)
- Target duration
- 90 Days
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Hepatology & Tropical Medicine Research Institute
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, ICU, National Hepatology & Tropical Medicine Research Institute
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07358741
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NHTMRI-IRB-30-2025
- Status last verified
- Jan 2026
- First submitted
- 9 Dec 2025
- Last updated
- 22 Jan 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: The individual participant data (IPD) generated in this study will not be made publicly available in order to protect participant confidentiality and comply with ethical regulations.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Jan 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Balancing Time and Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study Comparing the Effectiveness of the Standard Two-Day Advanced Life Support (ALS) Versus One Day Recertification Course
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07358741
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NHTMRI-IRB-30-2025
- Conditions
- Skill Performance, Knowledge
- Keywords
- Standard, recertification, ALS, ERC, knowledge retention
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 158 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- National Hepatology & Tropical Medicine Research InstituteOther government
- Study start
- 12 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 Jan 2026 (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.
this study aims to compare the effectiveness of a one-day versus two-day ALS recertification course in terms of knowledge retention, practical skills performance, participant satisfaction, and confidence.
Detailed description
demographic data will be collected, including participants' age, sex, specialty, prior ALS course completion, participation in resuscitation teams, last CPR performance, and total online learning hours (minimum 16 hours for the standard ALS course and 8 hours for the recertification course). All ALS courses (standard and recertification) will be conducted in accordance with the standardized curriculum, structure, and educational formats established by the European Resuscitation Council (ERC).
Assessments:
- Knowledge Assessment B. Practical Skills Performance C. Participant satisfaction and confidence at the end of each course
- Scoring: 0 = Not performed/incorrect, 1 = Partially/performed with prompting, 2 = Performed correctly and independently.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 90 Days
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| standard ALS course | – | –Two day course |
| Recertification Course | – | –one day course |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- demographic data will be collected, including participants' age, sex, specialty, prior ALS course completion, participation in resuscitation teams, last CPR performance, and total online learning hours (minimum 16 hours for the standard ALS course and 8 hours for the recertification course).
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Adult healthcare professionals (≥18 years) requiring ALS recertification, including doctors, nurses, and paramedics, who can attend the assigned course and follow-up assessments.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Participants will be excluded if they cannot attend the assigned course or decline consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
overall effectiveness between the two-day stanrdand one-day ALS recertification
Time frame: 24hours precourse
• Baseline knowledge score
Practical skill effectiveness
Time frame: 48 and 24 hours from standard amd recertification course respectively
• Standardized team-leader assessment station at the end of each course. Scoring: 0 = Not performed/incorrect, 1 = Partially/performed with prompting, 2 = Performed correctly and independently.
Knowledge retention assessment
Time frame: 3 months post course
post-course MCQ to evaluate decay; similar to pre-course MCQ
1 secondary outcome
Participant satisfaction e
Time frame: 48hours and 24 from standard and recertification course respectively
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 22 Jan 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. The individual participant data (IPD) generated in this study will not be made publicly available in order to protect participant confidentiality and comply with ethical regulations.
Related trials for Skill Performance
Active, not recruiting
Impact of Force Feedback in VR Training on EEG Biomarkers and Real-World Motor Performance
Motor Skills, Healthy Volunteer
Not yet recruiting
Impact of Generative AI on University Students' Learning Processes and Critical Thinking
Education, Academic Performance
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Cognitive Restructuring Intervention on Competitive State Anxiety and Volleyball Skill Performance Among Female Collegiate Volleyball Players in Guangzhou, China
Competitive State Anxiety, Volleyball Skill Performance
Active, not recruiting
TuJuggling: Comparing Two Juggling Learning Methods in College Students
Motor Skill Learning, Juggling Performance
Recruiting
Effect of Simulation-Based Postpartum Hemorrhage Training on Team Performance in Senior Anesthesiology Teams
Postpartum Hemorrhage, Simulation Based 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.
Eman Ibrahim El-Desoki Mahmoud, MD, intensive care medicine contact
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Skill Performance and Knowledge, run by National Hepatology & Tropical Medicine Research Institute at 1 site in Egypt.
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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 Jan 2026. 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 Egypt. 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?
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?
Contact Eman Ibrahim El-Desoki Mahmoud, MD, intensive care medicine (+2 01227409501, eman18350@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
overall effectiveness between the two-day stanrdand one-day ALS recertification (time frame: 24hours precourse). 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?
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 22 Jan 2026.