Crisis Resource Management Improvement Through Intellectual Questioning of Authority
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 入组人数
- 25
- 试验地点
- 2
- 主要终点
- Effect of a teaching intervention on participants' ability to challenge clearly wrong decisions by a superior during a simulated life-threatening crisis
研究概览
简要总结
This is a randomized controlled trial examining the effectiveness of a teaching intervention on residents' and medical students' ability to challenge clearly wrong decisions by a superior during a simulated life-threatening crisis. Participants will be randomly allocated into the control or intervention arm. The intervention arm will receive education on crisis resource management (CRM) and teaching targeting the cognitive skills required to monitor and challenge a superior's decision, and conflict resolution tools. Participants will then take part in a simulation scenario 2 to 4 weeks later and will be assessed based on 6 challenge points, followed by a debrief session.
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Other
- 盲法
- Triple (Participant, Care Provider, Outcomes Assessor)
盲法说明
Deliberate deception (by not informing of the aim of assessing for ability to challenge authority) will be used to blind the participants. However, open disclosure and explanation of the rationale for deception will be conducted during the debriefing sessions and participants will be extensively counselled.
The confederate specialist will also be blinded to the allocation of the control or intervention arm of participants.
All sessions will be video recorded and assessed in random order by two independent raters blinded to group allocation, using the modified Advocacy-Inquiry Score (mAIS).
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 21 Years 至 —（Adult, Older Adult）
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 否
入选标准
- •Medical officers or Internal medicine, surgical and emergency medicine residents who are in their 2nd post-graduate year of training, or
- •Phase V medical students from Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore
排除标准
- •Refusal for informed consent, or
- •Refusal for video recording during simulation sessions
结局指标
主要结局
Effect of a teaching intervention on participants' ability to challenge clearly wrong decisions by a superior during a simulated life-threatening crisis
时间窗: 20 minutes
Comparison of the best modified Advocacy-Inquiry Score (mAIS) responses of the 6 challenge opportunities between the intervention and control groups. The mAIS is a modification of the Advocacy-Inquiry method which includes five scoring levels with the addition of a sixth level when a trainee attempts to take over management of the case.
次要结局
- Influence of the confederate's gender on participant's ability to challenge incorrect decisions(20 minutes)