Artificial Intelligence Versus Human-controlled Doctor in Virtual Reality Simulation for Sepsis Team Training
Artificial Intelligence Versus Human-controlled Doctor in Virtual Reality Simulation for Sepsis Team Training: Randomized Controlled Trial
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Singapore, Singapore, 117597
- Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- All Year 3 NUS nursing students in Academic Year 2022
- Individuals 20 years old and above; and
- Consent to be video and/or audio-recorded
Exclusion Criteria:
- Year 1, 2 and 4 NUS nursing students;
- Incapable of giving informed consent;
- Unable to understand and/or speak in English language;
- Have visual, speech, and/or hearing impairment; and
- Do not agree to be video and/or audio-recorded.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Other
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: AI-powered group
Participants participated in a 2-hour Virtual Reality Simulation (VRS), which consisted of 2 simulation scenarios.
Participants had to perform nursing assessment and management of virtual patient, followed by communicating with an AI virtual doctor.
|
AI-powered virtual doctor
|
|
Active Comparator: Human-controlled group
Participants participated in a 2-hour Virtual Reality Simulation (VRS), which consisted of 2 simulation scenarios.
Participants had to perform nursing assessment and management of virtual patient, followed by communicating with a doctor avatar controlled by the medical student.
|
Virtual doctor avatar controlled by the medical student.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change from Baseline in Sepsis Knowledge on the 18-item sepsis knowledge test immediately after interventions.
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after 2-hour VRS
|
The 8-item communication knowledge and 18-item sepsis knowledge tests were developed and content validated by a multidisciplinary team comprising a medical doctor, an advanced practice nurse, and nursing academics.
|
Baseline and immediately after 2-hour VRS
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change from Baseline in Team Communication Knowledge on the 8-item communication knowledge test immediately after interventions.
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after 2-hour VRS
|
The 8-item communication knowledge and 18-item sepsis knowledge tests were developed and content validated by a multidisciplinary team comprising a medical doctor, an advanced practice nurse, and nursing academics.
|
Baseline and immediately after 2-hour VRS
|
|
Change from Baseline in Team Communication Self-Efficacy on the 6-item Patient Clinical Information Exchange and Interprofessional Communication Self-Efficacy Scale immediately after interventions.
Time Frame: Baseline and immediately after 2-hour VRS
|
The Patient Clinical Information Exchange and Interprofessional Communication Self-Efficacy Scale is a validated and self-reported instrument using a 0-100 Likert scale, which measures participants' perceptions of self-efficacy in team communication based on the ISBAR communication strategy.
|
Baseline and immediately after 2-hour VRS
|
|
Sepsis Care Performance through a 15-minute video-recorded simulation-based assessment within 2 weeks of postintervention.
Time Frame: Within 2 weeks of postintervention.
|
2 independent raters used the validated RAPIDS (Rescuing A Patient In Deteriorating Situation) tool to measure nurses' simulation performance in assessing and managing a deteriorating patient.
|
Within 2 weeks of postintervention.
|
|
Team Communication Performance through a 15-minute video-recorded simulation-based assessment within 2 weeks of postintervention.
Time Frame: Within 2 weeks of postintervention.
|
2 independent raters used a validated 9-item team communication scale to assess nurses' simulation performance in communicating with doctor using the TeamSTEPPS communication strategies.
|
Within 2 weeks of postintervention.
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Sok Ying Liaw, National University of Singapore
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- NUS-IRB-2022-202
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.