The Training and Evaluate Effect on Clinical Airway Management

March 4, 2019 updated by: Chunhua Yu, Peking Union Medical College Hospital

The Training and Evaluate Effect of Simulation on Clinical Airway Management During Perioperative Period

In this self-control experiment, anesthesiologists with limited experiments of bronchoscopy working in anesthesiology department in Peking Union Medical College Hospital will receive a training and evaluation procedure in simulation and clinical practice about clinical airway management. The objects was (1) to investigate the improvements of manufacturing bronchoscopy in simulation and clinical practise before and after training on simulation,(2) to record the efforts trainees needed to achieve experienced on simulation, (3) to evaluate if status manufacturing on simulations could reflect the ones in clinical practise.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

A modified global rating scale from 1 (unskilled) to 5 (expert) with a score of 3 linked to proficiency, and 5-points Likert from 1 (felt extremely unsure) to 5 (felt extremely confidence) with a score of 4 linked to confidence were used to evaluate during the procedure of training and evaluation.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

150

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.

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

15 years to 65 years (Child, Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. An anesthesiologist who is working on anesthesia airway management;
  2. During the research period, he/she worked in the anesthesiology department of Peking Union Medical College Hospital;
  3. Have some experience in airway management,Meet at least one of the following conditions: ①Airway management experience ≤10 cases;②Objective GRS score <3 points;③Subjective Likert score <3 points

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Cannot complete pre-training assessment;
  2. Cannot complete the training course;
  3. Cannot complete the post-training evaluation;
  4. Clinical airway managers were not performed during the study period.

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: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: anesthesiologist with limited experiment
Anesthesiologists with limited experiment of bronchoscopy.
Using the simulate device, the trainees are going to trained and evaluated the ability of driving bronchoscopy in simulate device and clinical practice.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change of Time needed.
Time Frame: Changes from baseline after finishing simulate training, an average of 1 month.
Change of time needed to navigate using bronchoscopy.
Changes from baseline after finishing simulate training, an average of 1 month.
Change of modified global rating scores (GRS).
Time Frame: Changes from baseline after finishing simulate training, an average of 1 month.
Change of modified global rating scores (GRS) rating manufacturing skills using bronchoscopy. Total score ranges from 4 to 20 scores at 1-score intervals, higher score matches better skill. Total score is the submission of four subscales, which evaluating central view, mucosal contact, progress and orientation using bronchoscopy, ranges from 1 to 5 scores at 1-score interval, higher scores represent better outcome.
Changes from baseline after finishing simulate training, an average of 1 month.
Change of Likert score.
Time Frame: Changes from baseline after finishing simulate training, an average of 1 month.
Change of Likert score evaluating self-confidence using bronchoscopy. Likert score ranges from 1 to 5 scores at 1-score intervals, higher score with more self-confidence.
Changes from baseline after finishing simulate training, an average of 1 month.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Inconsistency of evaluation of time needed between simulate and clinical practice.
Time Frame: At the beginning and after finishing the training, an average of 1 month.
Inconsistency of time needed to navigate using bronchoscopy.
At the beginning and after finishing the training, an average of 1 month.
Inconsistency of evaluation of modified global rating scores (GRS) between simulate and clinical practice.
Time Frame: At the beginning and after finishing the training, an average of 1 month.
Inconsistency of modified global rating scores (GRS) rating manufacturing skills, using bronchoscopy. Total score ranges from 4 to 20 scores at 1-score intervals, higher score matches better skill. Total score is the submission of four subscales, which evaluating central view, mucosal contact, progress and orientation using bronchoscopy, ranges from 1 to 5 scores at 1-score interval, higher scores represent better outcome.
At the beginning and after finishing the training, an average of 1 month.
Inconsistency of evaluation of Likert score between simulate and clinical practice.
Time Frame: At the beginning and after finishing the training, an average of 1 month.
Inconsistency of Likert score evaluating self-confidence using bronchoscopy. Likert score ranges from 1 to 5 scores at 1-score intervals, higher score with more self-confidence.
At the beginning and after finishing the training, an average of 1 month.

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Efforts needed on simulate.
Time Frame: An average of 6 hours, since begin of simulate training.
Hours needed to achieve well-trained.
An average of 6 hours, since begin of simulate training.
Efforts needed on simulate.
Time Frame: An average of 6 hours, since begin of simulate training.
Cases needed to achieve well-trained.
An average of 6 hours, since begin of simulate training.

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Study Chair: Chunhua Yu, Doctor, Peking Union Medical College Hospital

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 (Anticipated)

March 5, 2019

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

May 31, 2019

Study Completion (Anticipated)

January 2, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 14, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 25, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

February 26, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 6, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 4, 2019

Last Verified

March 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • zs1809

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Airway Management

Clinical Trials on anesthesiologist with limited experiment

Subscribe