Computer Debriefing and Screen-based Simulation

NCT03844009 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: RNN
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 30
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Debriefing after simulation plays a crucial role in student learning and medical practice. This paper focuses on impact of computer debriefing technique on knowledge retention of midwives during screen-based simulation of neonatal resuscitation.

Conditions

Computer Simulation; Neonatal Resuscitation

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• knowledge retention

  Knowledge assesment based on a validated questionnaire created from International Liaison Committee On Resuscitation guidelines at T0 (before simulation), T1 (after the first simulation session) and T2 (after the second simulation session, two month later)

  two months

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• Non-technical skills assesment

  two months

• Technical skills assessment

  two months

Study Arms (2)

Debriefing

EXPERIMENTAL

Participant's of the debriefing group had a computer integrated debriefing at the end of each scenario of the computer-based simulator

Other: Computer integrated debriefing

No debriefing

NO INTERVENTION

Participant's of the debriefing group had no computer integrated debriefing at the end of each scenario of the computer-based simulator

Interventions

Computer integrated debriefing OTHER

At the end of each computer-based simulation, the participant had a computer integrated debriefing of his performance during the neonatal resuscitation simulation and a debriefing based on an auto-evaluation of his non-technical skills.

Debriefing

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Student in midwifery in fourth year in france (penultimate year of the midwifery studies)

You may not qualify if:

• None

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Ilumens: lead

Study Sites (1)

Ilumens, Paris Descartes University

Paris, 75006, France

Location

Related Publications (3)

• van der Heide PA, van Toledo-Eppinga L, van der Heide M, van der Lee JH. Assessment of neonatal resuscitation skills: a reliable and valid scoring system. Resuscitation. 2006 Nov;71(2):212-21. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2006.04.009. Epub 2006 Sep 20.

  PMID: 16987590 BACKGROUND

• Donoghue A, Nishisaki A, Sutton R, Hales R, Boulet J. Reliability and validity of a scoring instrument for clinical performance during Pediatric Advanced Life Support simulation scenarios. Resuscitation. 2010 Mar;81(3):331-6. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.11.011. Epub 2010 Jan 4.

  PMID: 20047787 BACKGROUND

• Michelet D, Barre J, Truchot J, Piot MA, Cabon P, Tesniere A. Effect of Computer Debriefing on Acquisition and Retention of Learning After Screen-Based Simulation of Neonatal Resuscitation: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Serious Games. 2020 Aug 11;8(3):e18633. doi: 10.2196/18633.

  PMID: 32780021 DERIVED

Study Officials

• Antoine Tesnière, PhD

  Ilumens

  STUDY DIRECTOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: The outcomes assessor (questionnaire) was blinded of the allocation group of the participant.
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Principal Investigator

Model Details: randomized controlled study comparing two groups, one intervention group (debriefing) and one control group (no debriefing)

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: February 7, 2019
• First Posted: February 18, 2019
• Study Start: December 7, 2018
• Primary Completion: February 28, 2019
• Study Completion: March 31, 2019
• Last Updated: August 25, 2021

Record last verified: 2021-08

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

FR (1)