Examining the Effect of a Scripted Debriefing on Resuscitation Performance in Pediatrics (EXPRESS)

September 10, 2012 updated by: Express Collaborative

Examining Pediatric Resuscitation Education Using Simulation and Scripted Debriefing: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial

The investigative team's purpose for conducting this research is to improve effective and efficient translation and implementation of evidence based advanced life support practice to providers of care for children. This specific project aims to accomplish 2 major goals. The investigators aim to evaluate the utility of a debriefing script specifically designed to facilitate debriefing when used by novice Pediatric Advanced Life Support instructors during low and high realism simulation-based learning. Secondly, the investigators hope to evaluate the effectiveness of high realism simulation vs. low realism simulation in achieving PALS-based educational outcomes, such as knowledge and skill acquisition.

The investigators hypothesize that SCRIPTED debriefing by novice instructors following low and high fidelity simulation-based learning will :

  1. Improve the cognitive performance and knowledge of multidisciplinary team members as assessed by a cognitive performance tool and multiple choice testing compared with more traditional, NON-SCRIPTED debriefing;
  2. Improve the behavioural, teamwork and communication skills of multidisciplinary team members as assessed by a validated assessment tool compared with more traditional, NON-SCRIPTED debriefing;

The investigators hypothesize that HIGH REALISM simulation-based learning will:

  1. Improve the cognitive performance and knowledge of multidisciplinary team members as assessed by a cognitive performance tool and multiple choice testing compared with more traditional, LOW REALISM simulation;
  2. Improve the behavioural, teamwork and communication skills of multidisciplinary team members as assessed by a validated assessment tool compared with more traditional, LOW REALISM simulation;

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

443

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • British Columbia
      • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6H3N1
        • BC Children's Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • ADULT
  • OLDER_ADULT
  • CHILD

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria (Novice Instructors):

  • senior residents (general pediatric, emergency medicine, pediatric subspecialty) in year three of training or above
  • nursing staff, respiratory therapists or paramedics with greater than 5 years of clinical experience
  • recent PALS certification within the past 2 years

Inclusion Criteria (Team composition)

  • 1 or 2 pediatric nurses, 2 physicians (residents/fellows in pediatrics, anesthesia, family medicine, emergency medicine, pediatric emergency medicine, pediatric critical care or pediatric anesthesia) and/or 1 pediatric respiratory therapist or 1 pediatric transport paramedic

Exclusion Criteria (Novice Instructors):

  • experienced instructors, defined as having taught three or more courses for healthcare professionals where simulation was followed by debriefing

Exclusion Criteria (Team composition)

  • N/A

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: FACTORIAL
  • Masking: SINGLE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
NO_INTERVENTION: Non-Scripted Debriefing, Low Realism Simulation
A debriefing script was designed for novice instructors to facilitate a 20-minute debriefing session. In this arm, novice instructors were provided the scenario learning objectives but NO SCRIPT, and asked to observe the simulation and conduct a 20 minute debriefing. The simulation scenario itself was conducted with an infant simulator. The low realism group had the simulator with the compressor turned off, thus eliminating the functionality of physical findings.
EXPERIMENTAL: Scripted debriefing, Low Realism
In this arm, novice instructors were provided the scenario learning objectives WITH A DEBRIEFING SCRIPT, and asked to observe the simulation and conduct a 20 minute debriefing USING THE SCRIPT. The lo realism group had the simulator with the compressor turned on, thus eliminating the functionality of physical findings.

A debriefing script was designed for novice instructors to facilitate a 20-minute debriefing session. It was developed in iterative steps: (a) review of PALS learning objectives; (b) categorization of script content; (c) development of scripted language; (d) formatting into a cognitive aid and (e) pilot testing script for usability with subsequent edits before implementation in the study.

All novice instructors received the scenario 2 weeks prior to the study session. Instructors randomized to scripted debriefing were also given the script with no instruction on how to use it except on the day of the study, to use and follow the script as closely as possible during the debriefing session. All instructors held a clipboard while observing the simulation session; to hold the debriefing script and/or take notes. This allowed for blinding of the video reviewers as to which study arm the team had been randomized. Debriefing sessions were limited to 20-minutes in duration.

EXPERIMENTAL: non-Scripted Debriefing, High Realism Simulation
In this arm, novice instructors were provided the scenario learning objectives WITHOUT A DEBRIEFING SCRIPT, and asked to observe the simulation and conduct a 20 minute debriefing WITHOUT USING THE SCRIPT. The hi realism group had the simulator with the compressor turned on, thus activating the functionality of physical findings.
High vs. Low Physical Realism Simulators A pre-programmed infant simulator was used for all simulation sessions. To create "high" physical realism (HiR), full simulator functions were activated ("turned on") including vital sign monitoring, audio feedback, breath sounds, chest rise, heart sounds, palpable pulses, and vocalization. "Low" physical realism (LoR) groups had the identical simulator but the compressor was "turned off", thus eliminating physical findings described above. In addition, the LoR simulator was connected to a monitor, but it only displayed the cardiac rhythm, and not pulse oximetry, respiratory rate, blood pressure, temperature and audio feedback present in the HiR group. All other aspects of the simulated resuscitation environment were standardized for all groups.
EXPERIMENTAL: Scripted Debriefing, High Realism Simulation
In this arm, novice instructors were provided the scenario learning objectives WITH A DEBRIEFING SCRIPT, and asked to observe the simulation and conduct a 20 minute debriefing USING THE SCRIPT. The hi realism group had the simulator with the compressor turned on, thus activating the functionality of physical findings.

A debriefing script was designed for novice instructors to facilitate a 20-minute debriefing session. It was developed in iterative steps: (a) review of PALS learning objectives; (b) categorization of script content; (c) development of scripted language; (d) formatting into a cognitive aid and (e) pilot testing script for usability with subsequent edits before implementation in the study.

All novice instructors received the scenario 2 weeks prior to the study session. Instructors randomized to scripted debriefing were also given the script with no instruction on how to use it except on the day of the study, to use and follow the script as closely as possible during the debriefing session. All instructors held a clipboard while observing the simulation session; to hold the debriefing script and/or take notes. This allowed for blinding of the video reviewers as to which study arm the team had been randomized. Debriefing sessions were limited to 20-minutes in duration.

High vs. Low Physical Realism Simulators A pre-programmed infant simulator was used for all simulation sessions. To create "high" physical realism (HiR), full simulator functions were activated ("turned on") including vital sign monitoring, audio feedback, breath sounds, chest rise, heart sounds, palpable pulses, and vocalization. "Low" physical realism (LoR) groups had the identical simulator but the compressor was "turned off", thus eliminating physical findings described above. In addition, the LoR simulator was connected to a monitor, but it only displayed the cardiac rhythm, and not pulse oximetry, respiratory rate, blood pressure, temperature and audio feedback present in the HiR group. All other aspects of the simulated resuscitation environment were standardized for all groups.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Behavioural Assessment Tool Score (Percentage 0-100%)
Time Frame: Baseline of one hour (post debreifing) - note: reporting change in timeframe for all 3 outcome measures
Behavioral Assessment Tool The Behavioral Assessment Tool (BAT) was used to assess the team leader's crisis resource management skills during the pre and post-simulation scenarios. Each behavior is rated on a five-point Likert scale, where a score of one represents poor behavioral performance in the category and a score of five reflects excellent performance. Each behavior is supplement by descriptive anchors for poor (1), average (3) and excellent performance (5). Previous work done by LeFlore et al has focused on establishing reliability and validity of the tool in varying contexts. In a study of nurse practitioner students, data demonstrated a Cronbach's alpha of 0.97 with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.84 (p<0.001). In a different study assessing alternative educational models for interdisciplinary student teams, the BAT was used to assess behavioral performance and the Cronbach's alpha was 0.956.
Baseline of one hour (post debreifing) - note: reporting change in timeframe for all 3 outcome measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Clinical Performance Tool Score (Percentage 0-100%)
Time Frame: Baseline of one hour (post debreifing) - note: reporting change in timeframe for all 3 outcome measures
The Clinical Performance Tool, with 21 individual items, designed for evaluation of Pediatric Advanced Life Support scenarios, was utilized to assess clinical performance of the team. A total score (maximum 42 points) was converted into a percentage (0-100%) for analysis.
Baseline of one hour (post debreifing) - note: reporting change in timeframe for all 3 outcome measures
Multiple Choice Test (Knowledge)
Time Frame: Baseline of one hour (post debreifing) - note: reporting change in timeframe for all 3 outcome measures
For the 20 question test, 15 questions designed to test medical knowledge were chosen from the existing American Heart Association Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) question bank that have undergone rigorous validation, while 5 new questions were developed to assess knowledge of crisis resource management principles. As the study design required a "Test A and Test B", stems for the same questions were modified slightly (eg. different age of patient, different vital signs, different history) between the two different tests, but overall content and purpose of questions were structured to be the same.
Baseline of one hour (post debreifing) - note: reporting change in timeframe for all 3 outcome measures

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Elizabeth Hunt, MD, Johns Hopkins University

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

April 1, 2009

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

February 1, 2011

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

February 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 5, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 10, 2012

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

September 11, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

September 11, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 10, 2012

Last Verified

September 1, 2012

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 1-Robertson

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.

Clinical Trials on Pediatric Cardiac Arrest (Simulated)

Clinical Trials on Debriefing Script

3
Subscribe