Swimming Skill AcquisitionNCT07853495
Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction Versus Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction in 8-10-Year-Old Novice Swimmers
A study testing Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction and Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction in people with Swimming Skill Acquisition, run by Scientific Research Institute of Physical Education and Sports at 1 site in Uzbekistan.
Trial summary
This randomized study compared two 12-week learn-to-swim instructional approaches in novice children aged 8-10 years. Children were individually allocated in a 1:1 ratio to Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction or a classical learn-to-swim program. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 8 to 10 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Swimming Skill Acquisition
- What is being tested?
- Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction and Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 107 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUzbekistan
- Study dates
- 19 May 2025to 22 Aug 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 8 to 10 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Age 8.0-10.9 years.
- Classification as a novice swimmer, defined as a non-competitive child with limited prior formal swimming instruction.
- Ability to safely participate in shallow-water instructional activities, including basic water comfort and absence of diagnosed aquaphobia.
Who cannot join
- Any musculoskeletal, neurological, cardiovascular, or respiratory condition that might limit safe participation in swimming lessons.
- Ongoing pharmacological treatment affecting balance, motor control, or exercise tolerance.
- Current participation in structured competitive swimming training more than three sessions per week.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Uzbekistan1 site
Specialized Children's and Youth Sports School for Water Sports
Tashkent, Tashkent
About this study
Official title: A Randomized Comparison of Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction and Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction on 25-m Swimming Performance and Stroke Skill in 8-10-Year-Old Novice Swimmers
This randomized study compared two 12-week learn-to-swim instructional approaches in novice children aged 8-10 years. Children were individually allocated in a 1:1 ratio to Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction or a classical learn-to-swim program. Both groups received the same planned instructional exposure of 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, delivered three times per week for 90 minutes per session. The programs differed primarily in pedagogical organization rather than lesson frequency or duration. The primary outcome was 25-m front-crawl time. Secondary outcomes included 25-m backstroke time, blinded video-rated front-crawl and backstroke skill, and stroke count. Harms and safety events were monitored throughout the intervention.
Read the detailed description
The study was designed to compare different pedagogical organizations of learn-to-swim instruction under equivalent planned instructional exposure. After baseline testing, 107 children were randomized 1:1 to the classical group (n=53) or the Aquatic Skill-Efficiency group (n=54). Randomization used a computer-generated sequence with permuted blocks of four or six, stratified by sex, with allocation concealed until baseline measurements had been completed.
Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction was a structured pedagogical model organized around four learning components: Establish control, Elongate alignment, Economize propulsion, and Evaluate efficiency. These components emphasized breathing regulation and aquatic control, streamlined body alignment, economical propulsion, stroke-count awareness, breathing rhythm, perceived effort, mastery-based progression, and structured child self-monitoring.
The classical program used conventional learn-to-swim instruction emphasizing water familiarization, breath control, floating, gliding, kicking, basic arm actions, repeated short-distance front-crawl and backstroke practice, demonstration, repetition, and corrective feedback.
Both groups received 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, with three 90-minute sessions per week. Planned lesson frequency, nominal session duration, pool environment, group-size targets, instructor supervision, and overall instructional exposure were matched between groups. The principal difference between the groups was therefore the instructional structure and progression rather than the amount of scheduled pool time.
Because the instructional nature of the interventions prevented participant and instructor blinding, these individuals were aware of group assignment. Video-based stroke-skill assessments were performed independently by blinded assessors using anonymized recordings.
- Conditions
- Swimming Skill Acquisition
- Being tested
- Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction, Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction
- Keywords
- Learn-to-Swim Instruction, Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction, Aquatic Competence, Motor Learning, Swimming Performance, Front Crawl, Backstroke, Stroke Skill, Novice Swimmers, Children
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Aquatic Skill-Efficiency InstructionBehavioural
Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction was a structured 12-week learn-to-swim program delivered in 36 supervised sessions, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. The program was organized around four learning components: Establish control, Elongate alignment, Economize propulsion, and Evaluate efficiency. Instruction emphasized aquatic control, streamlined body alignment, economical propulsion, breathing rhythm, stroke-count awareness, mastery-based progression, efficiency-oriented feedback, and structured child self-monitoring.
Classical Learn-to-Swim InstructionBehavioural
Conventional learn-to-swim instruction was delivered over 12 weeks in 36 supervised sessions, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. Lessons emphasized water familiarization, breath control, floating, gliding, kicking, basic arm actions, repeated 12.5-25 m front-crawl and backstroke practice, demonstration, repetition, correction of visible errors, and progressive completion of short swimming distances.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction | Experimental | Participants assigned to this arm received Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction, a structured learn-to-swim program organized around four learning components: Establish control, Elongate alignment, Economize propulsion, and Evaluate efficiency. The program used systematic instructional sequencing, mastery-based progression, efficiency-oriented feedback, and structured child self-monitoring. Instruction was delivered in 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. Receives: Behavioral: Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction |
| Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction | Active comparator | Participants assigned to this arm received conventional learn-to-swim instruction emphasizing water familiarization, breath control, floating, gliding, kicking, basic arm actions, repeated 12.5-25 m front-crawl and backstroke practice, demonstration, repetition, correction of visible errors, and progressive completion of short swimming distances. Instruction was delivered in 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. Receives: Behavioral: Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
25-m Front-Crawl Time
Time required to complete 25 m front crawl from an in-water push start to first contact with the finish wall. At baseline, participants completed two trials and the arithmetic mean was used. At post-intervention, one 25-m trial was completed under the same standardized conditions. Lower values indicate faster swimming performance.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Secondary outcomes (5)
25-m Backstroke Time
Time required to complete 25 m backstroke from an in-water push start to first contact with the finish wall. At baseline, participants completed two trials and the arithmetic mean of the two trials was used as the baseline value. At post-intervention, participants completed one 25-m trial under the same standardized testing conditions. Lower values indicate faster swimming performance.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Front-Crawl Stroke Skill Score
Front-crawl technique was assessed from anonymized video recordings by two independent blinded assessors using a study-specific five-domain rubric covering body alignment, leg action, arm action, breathing control, and whole-stroke coordination. Each domain was scored from 0 to 2 points, producing a total score from 0 to 10 points. The final participant score was the mean of the two assessors' total scores. Higher values indicate better observable front-crawl technique.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Backstroke Stroke Skill Score
Backstroke technique was assessed from anonymized video recordings by two independent blinded assessors using a study-specific five-domain rubric covering body alignment, leg action, arm action, head control, and whole-stroke coordination. Each domain was scored from 0 to 2 points, producing a total score from 0 to 10 points. The final participant score was the mean of the two assessors' total scores. Higher values indicate better observable backstroke technique.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Front-Crawl Stroke Count
Number of single-arm actions performed over the 25-m front-crawl trial. Each right- or left-arm pull was counted as one stroke. Counting began with the first arm entry after the underwater push-off breakout and continued through completed arm pulls to the finish. The first baseline trial was used as the baseline analysis value, and the single post-intervention trial was used as the post-test value. Lower values indicate fewer arm actions over 25 m.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Backstroke Stroke Count
Number of single-arm actions performed over the 25-m backstroke trial. Each right- or left-arm pull was counted as one stroke. Counting began with the first arm entry after the underwater push-off breakout and continued through completed arm pulls to the finish. The first baseline trial was used as the baseline analysis value, and the single post-intervention trial was used as the post-test value. Lower values indicate fewer arm actions over 25 m.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Oct 2026
- Study start19 May 2025
- Primary completion22 Aug 2025
- Study completion22 Aug 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Swimming Skill AcquisitionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Two-group parallel randomized educational intervention with individual 1:1 allocation to Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction or classical learn-to-swim instruction. Both groups received matched planned instructional exposure over 12 weeks.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Scientific Research Institute of Physical Education and Sports
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07853495
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 610
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 26 Sep 2026
- Last updated
- 1 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant-level numerical data underlying the reported analyses will be shared, including the participant-level dataset used for the primary and secondary outcome analyses and de-identified assessor-level stroke-skill ratings used for inter-rater reliability analyses. A data dictionary describing the participant-level variables will also be provided. Potentially identifiable video recordings and participant-linked source documents will not be shared publicly because parental consent did not permit public dissemination of potentially identifiable material.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized Comparison of Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction and Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction on 25-m Swimming Performance and Stroke Skill in 8-10-Year-Old Novice Swimmers
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07853495
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 610
- Conditions
- Swimming Skill Acquisition
- Keywords
- Learn-to-Swim Instruction, Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction, Aquatic Competence, Motor Learning, Swimming Performance, Front Crawl, Backstroke, Stroke Skill
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 107 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Scientific Research Institute of Physical Education and SportsUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 19 May 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 22 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 22 Aug 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Oct 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 randomized study compared two 12-week learn-to-swim instructional approaches in novice children aged 8-10 years. Children were individually allocated in a 1:1 ratio to Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction or a classical learn-to-swim program. Both groups received the same planned instructional exposure of 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, delivered three times per week for 90 minutes per session. The programs differed primarily in pedagogical organization rather than lesson frequency or duration. The primary outcome was 25-m front-crawl time. Secondary outcomes included 25-m backstroke time, blinded video-rated front-crawl and backstroke skill, and stroke count. Harms and safety events were monitored throughout the intervention.
Detailed description
The study was designed to compare different pedagogical organizations of learn-to-swim instruction under equivalent planned instructional exposure. After baseline testing, 107 children were randomized 1:1 to the classical group (n=53) or the Aquatic Skill-Efficiency group (n=54). Randomization used a computer-generated sequence with permuted blocks of four or six, stratified by sex, with allocation concealed until baseline measurements had been completed.
Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction was a structured pedagogical model organized around four learning components: Establish control, Elongate alignment, Economize propulsion, and Evaluate efficiency. These components emphasized breathing regulation and aquatic control, streamlined body alignment, economical propulsion, stroke-count awareness, breathing rhythm, perceived effort, mastery-based progression, and structured child self-monitoring.
The classical program used conventional learn-to-swim instruction emphasizing water familiarization, breath control, floating, gliding, kicking, basic arm actions, repeated short-distance front-crawl and backstroke practice, demonstration, repetition, and corrective feedback.
Both groups received 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, with three 90-minute sessions per week. Planned lesson frequency, nominal session duration, pool environment, group-size targets, instructor supervision, and overall instructional exposure were matched between groups. The principal difference between the groups was therefore the instructional structure and progression rather than the amount of scheduled pool time.
Because the instructional nature of the interventions prevented participant and instructor blinding, these individuals were aware of group assignment. Video-based stroke-skill assessments were performed independently by blinded assessors using anonymized recordings.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Two-group parallel randomized educational intervention with individual 1:1 allocation to Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction or classical learn-to-swim instruction. Both groups received matched planned instructional exposure over 12 weeks.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction | Experimental | Behavioral: Aquatic Skill-Efficiency InstructionParticipants assigned to this arm received Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction, a structured learn-to-swim program organized around four learning components: Establish control, Elongate alignment, Economize propulsion, and Evaluate efficiency. The program used systematic instructional sequencing, mastery-based progression, efficiency-oriented feedback, and structured child self-monitoring. Instruction was delivered in 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. |
| Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction | Active comparator | Behavioral: Classical Learn-to-Swim InstructionParticipants assigned to this arm received conventional learn-to-swim instruction emphasizing water familiarization, breath control, floating, gliding, kicking, basic arm actions, repeated 12.5-25 m front-crawl and backstroke practice, demonstration, repetition, correction of visible errors, and progressive completion of short swimming distances. Instruction was delivered in 36 supervised sessions over 12 weeks, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 8 to 10 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Age 8.0-10.9 years.
- Classification as a novice swimmer, defined as a non-competitive child with limited prior formal swimming instruction.
- Ability to safely participate in shallow-water instructional activities, including basic water comfort and absence of diagnosed aquaphobia.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Any musculoskeletal, neurological, cardiovascular, or respiratory condition that might limit safe participation in swimming lessons.
- Ongoing pharmacological treatment affecting balance, motor control, or exercise tolerance.
- Current participation in structured competitive swimming training more than three sessions per week.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Aquatic Skill-Efficiency InstructionAquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction was a structured 12-week learn-to-swim program delivered in 36 supervised sessions, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. The program was organized around four learning components: Establish control, Elongate alignment, Economize propulsion, and Evaluate efficiency. Instruction emphasized aquatic control, streamlined body alignment, economical propulsion, breathing rhythm, stroke-count awareness, mastery-based progression, efficiency-oriented feedback, and structured child self-monitoring. | Behavioural | Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction |
| Classical Learn-to-Swim InstructionConventional learn-to-swim instruction was delivered over 12 weeks in 36 supervised sessions, three times per week, with a nominal duration of 90 minutes per session. Lessons emphasized water familiarization, breath control, floating, gliding, kicking, basic arm actions, repeated 12.5-25 m front-crawl and backstroke practice, demonstration, repetition, correction of visible errors, and progressive completion of short swimming distances. | Behavioural | Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction |
Primary outcome
25-m Front-Crawl Time
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Time required to complete 25 m front crawl from an in-water push start to first contact with the finish wall. At baseline, participants completed two trials and the arithmetic mean was used. At post-intervention, one 25-m trial was completed under the same standardized conditions. Lower values indicate faster swimming performance.
5 secondary outcomes
25-m Backstroke Time
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Front-Crawl Stroke Skill Score
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Backstroke Stroke Skill Score
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Front-Crawl Stroke Count
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
Backstroke Stroke Count
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)
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 1 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant-level numerical data underlying the reported analyses will be shared, including the participant-level dataset used for the primary and secondary outcome analyses and de-identified assessor-level stroke-skill ratings used for inter-rater reliability analyses. A data dictionary describing the participant-level variables will also be provided. Potentially identifiable video recordings and participant-linked source documents will not be shared publicly because parental consent did not permit public dissemination of potentially identifiable material.
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 Aquatic Skill-Efficiency Instruction and Classical Learn-to-Swim Instruction in people with Swimming Skill Acquisition, run by Scientific Research Institute of Physical Education and Sports at 1 site in Uzbekistan.
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 3 inclusion and 3 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 1 Oct 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 Uzbekistan. 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?
25-m Front-Crawl Time (time frame: Baseline (week 0) and post-intervention (week 12)). 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 1 Oct 2026.