High Fidelity Simulation vs Standard Teaching Training of Cardiac Resuscitation

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Cardiac Arrest

• Registration Number: NCT02483546
• Lead Sponsor: University of Monastir

Brief Summary

High fidelity Simulation has spread from anesthesiology to other disciplines such as internal medicine, pediatrics, and emergency medicine . Over the past decade, the use of simulation in medical education has increased exponentially. The term ''simulation'' spans a wide variety of formats, from the low-tech actor portraying a standardized patient to high-fidelity mannequin-based human patient simulation (HPS). HPS is able of both simulating realistic patient encounters and giving real-time, physiologically accurate feedback. Studies thus far show that use of simulation in training medical students and residents is helpful in strengthening students' knowledge and in evaluating their performance. Students appreciate simulation-based education as ''an opportunity to learn new skills in a safe environment .

Detailed Description

This was a randomized, controlled trial of a simulation- based educational intervention designed to increase medicine student's clinical skills in cardiac arrest procedures .The investigators included 181 fifth-year medical students rotating in the emergency department of Fattouma Bourguiba University hospital of Monastir (Tunisia) during the period from January 2013 to January 2014.Students were randomized into two groups using a random number generator to an intervention group (simulatortrained, n = 99) or a control group (traditionally teaching, n =82).

The investigators conducted a prospective, randomized, non-blinded study to determine whether simulation based training is superior to traditional teaching in the assessment and management of simulated patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by ventricular fibrillation.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2014-01
• Study First Submitted: 2015-02-20
• Study First Submitted QC: 2015-06-26
• Study First Posted: 2015-06-29
• Primary Completion: 2015-08
• Study Completion: 2015-09
• Status Verified: 2016-06
• Last Update Submitted: 2016-06-17
• Last Update Posted: 2016-06-20

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 181

Inclusion Criteria

• Medecine students

Exclusion Criteria

• Non Medecine students

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
better acquisition of cognitive skills for students	just after randomisation (one day)	Pretest using 20 multiple choice questions after randomization. A second round of the same testing was then conducted for both groups just after the course (posttest). The test score range from 0 to 20 (maximum). The difference between the rating of the post-test and pre-test identifies the delta score of the student.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Satisfaction 5 point likert scale	just after randomisation (one day)	Students rated their satisfaction level with a 5 point likert scale framed as attitude toward simulation compared with control group: dissatisfied (1 point), fairly satisfied (2 points), neither satisfied (3points), satisfied (4 points), and very satisfied (5 points).

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

university of Monastir; 🇹🇳 Monastir, Tunisia