Video-Based Versus Bedside eFAST Training in Final-Year Medical Students

Comparative Effectiveness of Video-Based and Bedside Teaching for eFAST Training in Final-Year Medical Students: A Randomised Controlled Educational Trial

This study compared two methods of teaching the Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (eFAST) examination to final-year medical students. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either a 60-minute standardized video-based training session or a 60-minute instructor-led bedside training session. Both groups received the same educational content, for the same duration, from the same instructor.

Within one hour after completing the training, each participant performed an individual eFAST examination on a healthy volunteer. Performance was assessed by an evaluator who was unaware of the participant's training group, using an eFAST Image Acquisition Checklist. The study compared overall immediate eFAST performance between the two teaching methods and also examined performance in individual eFAST examination windows.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Medical Education; Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS); eFast
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Standardized Video-Based eFAST Training; Other: Instructor-Led Bedside eFAST Training

Detailed Description

This was a single-center, parallel-group, individually randomized educational trial involving final-year medical students undertaking an emergency medicine clerkship. Participants with previous formal ultrasound training or prior practical ultrasound experience were excluded. One hundred consenting participants were randomized, with 50 assigned to standardized video-based eFAST training and 50 assigned to instructor-led bedside eFAST training.

Both interventions lasted 60 minutes and covered the same theoretical and practical eFAST content. Participants underwent an individual practical assessment on a healthy volunteer within one hour after training. Outcome assessors were blinded to training allocation. Performance was assessed using an eFAST Image Acquisition Checklist, which generated an overall score ranging from 0 to 100 and window-specific classifications of error-free performance.

No primary outcome was designated in advance of the analysis. For the present report and retrospective trial registration, the overall eFAST performance score is designated as the primary outcome, while the window-level comparisons are considered exploratory secondary outcomes.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 100
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Istanbul
    • Kadıköy, Istanbul, Turkey (Türkiye)
      • Istanbul Medeniyet University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Child; Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Current enrollment as a final-year (sixth-year) medical student at İstanbul Medeniyet University Faculty of Medicine.

Participation in the emergency medicine clerkship during the study period. Provision of written informed consent before randomization.

Exclusion Criteria:

Previous formal ultrasound training. Prior practical ultrasound experience. A physical condition that could interfere with performing an ultrasound examination.

Declining or not providing written informed consent.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Video-Based eFAST Training; Participants received a 60-minute standardized video-based eFAST training session. The video was recorded on a healthy volunteer and covered the theoretical principles and practical performance of eFAST, including clinical indications, ultrasound physics, examination windows, transducer selection, probe positioning and orientation, image optimization, normal anatomical landmarks, and representative pathological images.	Other: Standardized Video-Based eFAST Training; Participants watched a standardized 60-minute instructional video covering the theoretical principles and practical performance of eFAST. The video was recorded on a healthy volunteer and included demonstrations of the examination with visual annotation. Content included the principles and clinical indications of eFAST, ultrasound physics, examination windows, transducer selection, probe positioning and orientation, image optimization, normal anatomical landmarks, and representative pathological images.
Active Comparator: Instructor-Led Bedside eFAST Training; Participants received a 60-minute instructor-led bedside eFAST training session on a healthy volunteer. The session covered the same theoretical and practical content as the video-based intervention and included live demonstration of each eFAST examination window followed by supervised practice, during which each participant performed the examination once under direct guidance.	Other: Instructor-Led Bedside eFAST Training; Participants received a 60-minute instructor-led bedside training session delivered by the same emergency physician on a healthy volunteer. The session covered the same theoretical and practical eFAST content as the video-based intervention and included live demonstration of each examination window followed by supervised practice, during which each participant performed the examination once under direct guidance.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Overall eFAST Performance Score	Overall practical eFAST performance was assessed using the eFAST Image Acquisition and Interpretation Assessment Checklist. The checklist comprised 21 image-acquisition items across six eFAST windows and one image-differentiation component. Image-acquisition items contributed a maximum of 84 points and image differentiation contributed a maximum of 16 points, yielding a total score from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better performance. For this retrospective registration, the overall performance score is designated as the primary outcome; no primary outcome was prospectively designated before the analysis.	Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Error-Free Anterior Lung Window Performance	Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the anterior lung eFAST window correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.	Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session
Error-Free Subxiphoid Window Performance	Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the subxiphoid eFAST window correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.	Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session
Error-Free Right Upper Quadrant Window Performance	Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the right upper quadrant eFAST window.correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.	Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session
Error-Free Left Upper Quadrant Window Performance	Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the left upper quadrant eFAST windowcorrectly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.	Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session
Error-Free Pelvic Window Performance	Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the pelvic eFAST window correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.	ithin 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Gorkem Alper Solakoglu

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): August 1, 2025
• Primary Completion (Actual): November 30, 2025
• Study Completion (Actual): November 30, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: August 25, 2026
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: August 25, 2026
• First Posted (Actual): August 27, 2026

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): August 27, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: August 25, 2026
• Last Verified: August 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: medical education; randomised controlled trial; point-of-care ultrasound; eFAST; video-based learning; bedside teaching
• Other Study ID Numbers: EFAST-EDU-2025-01

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: De-identified individual participant data underlying the reported results may be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Public deposition of individual-level data is not planned because the participant consent did not cover public data deposition. Requests will be considered in accordance with applicable ethical and institutional requirements.

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No