Individual Versus Grouped Debriefing Approaches in Anaesthesia Crisis Simulation-Based Training. What Impact On The Technical Score ? (DEBRIEF-SIM)

October 23, 2013 updated by: Floriane CICERON, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besancon

Simulation-based training is essential in learning or maintaining skills in high risk industry such as aviation and railway and in the medical field like anaesthesia. Debriefing following simulation is fundamental in order to reduce the emotional impact of the session and to asses the technical and non-technical skills (behavior). Even if the ideal debriefing method is still to be found, individual debriefing is considered as the gold standard but time consuming. The DEBRIEF-SIM study is a prospective, single blinded, multicentric and randomized study that will compare the individual (defined by learning couple resident and nurse) approach to a grouped (several couples) debriefing. The primary end point is to define the noninferiority of this approach compared to the individual one on the educational impact.

The learners will be debriefed according to their randomization after the first session, but will all undergo individual debriefing following the second session.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Individual debriefing consists in a individual meeting between each subject of the study and the investigator to analyze the management of the anaesthesia crisis simulated.

Grouped debriefing consists in the analysis by the investigator of the management of the anaesthesia crisis simulated in the presence of all the subjects included in the Grouped Debriefing group.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

48

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

  • France
      • Besancon, France, 25000
        • Faculté de Franche-Comte des études de medecine et pharmaceutiques

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

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Doctor:

    • resident in anesthesia and intensive care CHU Besançon and Dijon

Student nurse anesthetist:

  • Student nurse anesthesist 1st or 2nd year of school Besançon and Dijon

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Subjects incapable of giving consent: incapacitated (subjects under guardianship), minors (< 18 years)
  • Refusal to participate in the study
  • Refusal to sign the confidentiality clause

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

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Other: Individual Debriefing
Individual debriefing consists in a individual meeting between each subject of the study and the investigator to analyze the management of the anaesthesia crisis simulated.
Other: Individual Debriefing
Individual debriefing consists in a individual meeting between each subject of the study and the investigator to analyze the management of the anaesthesia crisis simulated.
Other: Grouped Debriefing
Grouped debriefing consists in the analysis of the management of the anaesthesia crisis simulated in the presence of all the subject included in the Grouped Debriefing group.
Other: Grouped Debriefing
Debriefing consists in an analysis by the investigator of the management of the anaesthesia crisis simulated in the presence of all the subjects included in the Groupe Debriefing group.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Score of technical competence
Time Frame: 2 months
2 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besancon

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Sébastien Pili-Floury, Faculté de Franche-Comte des études de medecine et pharmaceutiques

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

March 1, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2013

Study Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2013

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

March 29, 2013

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 18, 2013

First Posted (Estimate)

April 19, 2013

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

October 24, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 23, 2013

Last Verified

October 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • EI/2012/028

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 Pregnancy

Clinical Trials on Individual Debriefing

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Zimbabwe

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe