Effect of Simulation-based Procedure Training for Novice Cardiac Device Implanters Towards Implant Proficiency
- Conditions
- Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
- Interventions
- Other: Traditional simulation trainingOther: Proficiency-Based Progression simulation training
- Registration Number
- NCT05952908
- Lead Sponsor
- Jorio Mascheroni
- Brief Summary
This is an educational research study involving novice cardiac device implanters willing to further enhance their device implant skills through optional simulation-based training. The goal is to prospectively compare the effect of two different simulation-based training approaches on the quality of operators' implant performance in a simulated environment. The hypothesis is that a novel simulation training curriculum requiring trainees to demonstrate predefined proficiency benchmarks to advance (proficiency-based progression method) would generate superior performances compared to a traditional simulation training curriculum without proficiency requirements but identical content/tools. At the end of the instruction each trainee will perform a final simulated implant procedure which will be (anonymously) video-recorded and consequently scored by independent reviewers using previously validated intraoperative performance metrics. The effect of the two training approaches will be evaluated and performances compared by group for each metric independently.
- Detailed Description
BACKGROUND: In cardiac device implant training, there is no common system to objectively assess trainees' ability to perform tasks at predetermined performance levels prior to in-vivo practice. Patients are potentially exposed to risks related to operators' early learning curve. A novel approach to enhance the learning outcome could be a metric-based, simulation training to proficiency. Such an approach to training is known as proficiency-based progression (PBP) and requires trainees to demonstrate a predefined proficiency benchmark, quantified by validated procedure performance metrics, before proceeding to the next stage of training. Published results in various domains of procedural medicine show that PBP trainees perform \~60% better compared to their non-PBP trained peers. This approach has never been tested for device implant training yet.
INTERVENTION: The training curriculum developed for the study purpose will cover a triple chamber device system implantation (i.e., cardiac resynchronization therapy = CRT) and will comprise two mandatory modules: a self-paced e-learning component and a peer-to-peer simulation-based component at a skill center. The content, the resources and the agenda of the training curriculum will be the same for both study groups; only the criteria for the trainees to proceed through the training stages will differ.
STUDY IMPLICATIONS: Compared to traditional simulation training, metrics-based training to proficiency may ensure a superior, consistent, objectively assessed target-level of operator's performance before they advance to (supervised) in-vivo practice.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 32
- Physicians actively practicing cardiac device implantation at time of enrolment
- Minimum 20 pacemaker/defibrillator systems previously implanted as 1st operator
- Minimum 3 cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) systems previously implanted at least as 2nd operator
- Familiarity with English language (written and spoken)
- Having previously implanted ≥ 200 CRT systems as 1st operator
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Traditional training group Traditional simulation training Trainees in this group will follow the simulation-based implant training curriculum (same content/tools in both study arms) but they will not be required to demonstrate a quantitatively defined proficiency benchmark at each training stage to be able to advance to the next stage. Proficiency-Based Progression training group Proficiency-Based Progression simulation training Trainees in this group will follow the simulation-based implant training curriculum (same content/tools in both study arms) and they will be required to demonstrate a quantitatively defined proficiency benchmark at each training stage to be able to advance to the next stage (proficiency-based progression \[PBP\] approach).
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Number of Errors in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Procedural Errors is an intraoperative performance metric objectively assessed/scored from each trainee's (anonymous) simulated implant video-recording acquired at the end of the training as a final skills assessment. The analysis will compare the medians of each group.
Number of Errors All Combined (Errors + Critical Errors) in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Procedural Errors All Combined, represents the total amount of deviations from optimal performance (Errors + Critical Errors) and it's an overall indicator of performance quality. The analysis will compare the medians of each group.
Number of procedural Steps Completed in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Procedural Steps Completed is an intraoperative performance metric objectively assessed/scored from each trainee's (anonymous) simulated implant video-recording acquired at the end of the training as a final skills assessment. The analysis will compare the medians of each group.
Number of Critical Errors in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Procedural Critical Errors is an intraoperative performance metric objectively assessed/scored from each trainee's (anonymous) simulated implant video-recording acquired at the end of the training as a final skills assessment. The analysis will compare the medians of each group.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Cineradiography duration (s) in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Four procedural measures will be derived from video-recordings of the implant performances on the virtual reality simulator: Procedure duration, Fluoroscopy duration, Cineradiography duration, amount of Contrast Media injected. The analysis will compare the medians of each group (each variable is compared independently).
Number of trainees per study group demonstrating the proficiency benchmark in the final assessment 1 hour post-intervention The number of trainees per study group demonstrating the proficiency benchmark in the video-recorded performance at the end of the training curriculum.
Fluoroscopy duration (min) in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Four procedural measures will be derived from video-recordings of the implant performances on the virtual reality simulator: Procedure duration, Fluoroscopy duration, Cineradiography duration, amount of Contrast Media injected. The analysis will compare the medians of each group (each variable is compared independently).
Contrast Media injected (ml) in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Four procedural measures will be derived from video-recordings of the implant performances on the virtual reality simulator: Procedure duration, Fluoroscopy duration, Cineradiography duration, amount of Contrast Media injected. The analysis will compare the medians of each group (each variable is compared independently).
Participants' satisfaction level at the end of the training curriculum (mean score per group on a Likert scale, from 0 [minimum, worst outcome] to 10 [maximum, best outcome]) 3 hours post-intervention Participants' satisfaction level regarding the training received expressed on a Likert scale; feedback will be provided anonymously through the training evaluation forms filled at the end of the program. The scale title will be "Probability of recommending the curriculum to a peer". The outcome will span from 0 \[minimum, worst outcome\] to 10 \[maximum, best outcome\].
Procedure duration (min) in the final skills assessment (median per group) 1 hour post-intervention Four procedural measures will be derived from video-recordings of the implant performances on the virtual reality simulator: Procedure duration, Fluoroscopy duration, Cineradiography duration, amount of Contrast Media injected. The analysis will compare the medians of each group (each variable is compared independently).
Score obtained in the online knowledge test (percentage of correct answers per group, from 0 [minimum, worst outcome] to 100 [maximum, best outcome]) 1 hour post-intervention At the completion of the online component of the training curriculum, trainees are required to take a summative knowledge test online. The scale title will be "Percentage of correct answers in the online assessment". The outcome will span from 0 \[minimum, worst outcome\] to 100 \[maximum, best outcome\].
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
KU Leuven
🇧🇪Leuven, Belgium