Comparison of Using a Video vs. Text to Improve Learning of Secure Communication During a Crisis in Anesthesia: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study in Simulation
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 尚未招募
- 发起方
- 入组人数
- 80
- 主要终点
- communication events
研究概览
简要总结
Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care. Secure and standardized communication involves clear, concise, and unambiguous language. Methods of secure communication include closed-loop communication (CLC), precise and complete communication (direct, full dosage), and the use of the SBAR tool. To improve healthcare professionals' communication, it is essential to use effective educational tools. Traditionally, lectures or reading articles were the standard methods. The use of video as a tool for knowledge and skills transfer seems promising. The objective is to compare the learning of secure communication in crisis situations in anesthesia after using two different educational supports: a text versus an educational video.
A prospective, multicenter, controlled, and randomized study will be conducted during high-fidelity simulation sessions in anesthesia, comparing a group using a text-type educational support versus a group using an educational video. It will take place in simulation centers. Voluntary participants will be anesthesia and critical care residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios. After their consent, participants will be randomized into two groups:
- Text group: Participants will read a text-type educational support for 15 minutes at the beginning of the session before their involvement in 2 high-fidelity crisis simulation scenarios.
- Video group: Participants will watch a 15-minute educational video at the beginning of the session before their involvement in the 2 high-fidelity simulation scenarios.
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) c) Number of directive verbal orders d) Number of correct medication dosages. This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts (external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2). This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts. The number of verbal orders per scenario will also be recorded.
The secondary endpoint will be to evaluate each item independently, the proportion of CLC per verbal order, satisfaction with the educational tool (Kirkpatrick level 1), and the perception of learning in terms of secure communication (1 to 10 Likert scale, Kirkpatrick level 2). Participants' characteristics will also be collected.
详细描述
Introduction Effective resolution of a crisis situation in anesthesia and critical care requires both technical and non-technical skills (1). Non-technical skills (NTS) include leadership, task distribution, teamwork, and communication. Moreover, communication issues are common in the operating room (2). Poor team communication in the OR is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (3). Thus, experts recommend that the healthcare team in a crisis situation use secure and standardized communication to improve the quality and safety of care (to reduce morbidity and mortality and limit the incidence of adverse events) (1). Secure and standardized communication involves clear, concise, and unambiguous language. Methods of secure communication include closed-loop communication (CLC), precise and complete communication (direct, full dosage), and the use of the SBAR tool (1).
To improve healthcare professionals' communication, it is essential to use effective educational tools. Traditionally, lectures or reading articles were the standard methods. More recently, simulation has shown its value in acquiring these skills (1)(4). However, given the large number of professionals and the limited number of trainers, other educational tools must be developed to allow training for as many professionals as possible.
The use of video as a tool for knowledge and skills transfer seems promising. Nowadays, many teenagers and adults regularly watch videos on digital platforms. Animated images offer many advantages over text. Research in psychology shows that 93% of human communication is non-verbal (5). Additionally, the human brain deciphers different elements of an image simultaneously, whereas spoken or written language is decoded linearly and sequentially, which takes more time (5). Consequently, the use of images for knowledge transfer would be particularly relevant as learning is more effective when visual, oral, or written information is provided simultaneously rather than sequentially (5). In the healthcare field, using images related to written or spoken text has proven particularly effective for knowledge transmission (6). Illustrated text allows participants to develop more complex cognitive structures than those who do not benefit from images (7).
Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the learning of secure communication in crisis situations in anesthesia after using two different educational supports: a text versus an educational video.
Materials and Methods A prospective, multicenter, controlled, and randomized study will be conducted during high-fidelity simulation sessions in anesthesia, comparing a group using a text-type educational support versus a group using an educational video. It will take place in simulation centers. Voluntary participants will be anesthesia residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios.
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
- Single (Outcomes Assessor)
盲法说明
The evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts.
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- •anesthesia residents and/or nurse anesthetists who have used one of the educational supports and then actively participated in the simulation scenarios.
排除标准
- •technical problem video
- •declines active participation in the session
结局指标
主要结局
communication events
时间窗: 30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator
The primary endpoint will be to compare the total number of correct secure communication events during the crisis between the 2 groups, which includes: a) Number of correctly performed SBAR (1 correct event = 1 point) b) Number of correctly or partially performed closed-loop communications (CLC) (1 correct event = 1 point, partial = ½ point) c) Number of directive verbal orders (using a name or the pronoun "you") (1 correct event = 1 point) d) Number of correct medication dosages (medication with route of administration and dosage) (1 correct event = 1 point). This evaluation will be based on video recordings of the 2 scenarios assessed by 2 independent, blinded experts. This composite score is based on various secure communication methods described in the literature and recommended by experts (1). It corresponds to an external evaluation of a team's secure communication skills (Kirkpatrick level 2).
次要结局
- medication dosages(30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator)
- perception of learning(1 minute and the end of the session by all residents)
- Satisfaction(1 minute and the end of the session by all residents)
- Closed-loop-communication(30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator)
- SBAR (situation, background, assessment, recommandation) tool(30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator)
- closed-loop communication(30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator)
- verbal orders(30 minutes by video after the end of the session by an external evaluator)
