A Comparison Between Physical and Virtual Simulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

NCT04330924 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: S-17-107
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 120
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Nurse-physician communication skills can be improve through inter-professional team training. Simulation is often used to conduct these training. However, constraints to conduct these sessions such as scheduling and logistic arrangements have been widely reported. Thus with the advancement of technology in education, the use of virtual environment to conduct the team training is being explored and evaluated.

Conditions

Interdisciplinary Communication

Keywords

team training; virtual reality; simulation; nurse-physician communication

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (19)

• Demographics

  Collection of participant demographic data.

  Baseline

• Communication skill performance

  Participants nurse-doctor communication skill was measured using a validated team communication scale that was self-developed. It is a 7-item checklist with a 5-point scale. The score ranges from 5 to 35 with higher score indicating better nurse-doctor communication performance.

  Post-test (immediately after simulation assessment)

• Baseline (Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Health Care Team)

  Measurement of participants' attitudes towards working in interprofessional care team using the 14-item Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Health Care Team questionnaire using a 5-point scale. The scores ranges from 14 to 70 with higher score indicating more positive attitudes.

  Pre-test

• Post-test (Change of Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Health Care Team from baseline)

  Measurement of participants' attitudes towards working in interprofessional care team using the 14-item Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Health Care Team questionnaire using a 5-point scale. The scores ranges from 14 to 70 with higher score indicating more positive attitudes.

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Follow-up (Change of Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Health Care Team from baseline and post-test)

  Measurement of participants attitudes towards working in interprofessional care team using the 14-item Attitudes Toward Interprofessional Health Care Team questionnaire using a 5-point scale. The scores ranges from 14 to 70 with higher score indicating more positive attitudes.

  Follow-up (2-months after simulation training)

• Baseline (Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale)

  Measurement of participants behaviors, beliefs and attitudes in interprofessional socialization using the 24-item Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale questionnaire using a 7-point scale (1= not at all ; 7= to a very great extent; "not applicable" response is also available). The score ranges from 24 to 168 with higher score indicating greater presence of the attributes measured.

  Pre-test

• Post-test (Change of Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale from baseline)

  Measurement of participants behaviors, beliefs and attitudes in interprofessional socialization using the 24-item Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale questionnaire using a 7-point scale (1= not at all ; 7= to a very great extent; "not applicable" response is also available). The score ranges from 24 to 168 with higher score indicating greater presence of the attributes measured.

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Follow-up (Change of Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale from baseline and post-test)

  Measurement of participants behaviors, beliefs and attitudes in interprofessional socialization using the 24-item Interprofessional Socialization and Valuing Scale questionnaire using a 7-point scale (1= not at all ; 7= to a very great extent; "not applicable" response is also available). The score ranges from 24 to 168 with higher score indicating greater presence of the attributes measured.

  Follow-up (2-months after simulation training)

• Pulse rate

  Stress measurement parameter using a continuous monitoring smart watch

  Pre-test

• Pulse rate (Change of parameter from baseline)

  Stress measurement parameter using a continuous monitoring smart watch

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Blood pressure (diastolic & systolic)

  Stress measurement parameter using a sphygmomanometer

  Pre-test

• Blood pressure (diastolic & systolic) (Change of parameter from baseline)

  Stress measurement parameter using a sphygmomanometer

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Baseline (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory)

  Measurement of participants state anxiety were measured using the 20-items State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaire using a 4 point likert scale (almost never-almost always). The score ranges from 20 to 80 with higher score indicating higher sense of anxiety.

  Pre-test

• Post-test (Change of State-Trait Anxiety Inventory from baseline)

  Measurement of participants state anxiety were measured using the 20-items State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaire using a 4 point likert scale (almost never-almost always). The score ranges from 20 to 80 with higher score indicating higher sense of anxiety.

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Baseline (Confidence and self-efficacy)

  Measurement of participants confidence and self-efficacy was measured using a 5-items self-efficacy questionnaire through a 10-point likert scale ranging from scores ranging from 5 to 50 with higher score indicating better self-efficacy in their ability in contributing to patient-centered care in a multidisciplinary team.

  Pre-test

• Post-test (Change of Confidence and self-efficacy from baseline)

  Measurement of participants confidence and self-efficacy was measured using a 5-items self-efficacy questionnaire through a 10-point likert scale ranging from scores ranging from 5 to 50 with higher score indicating better self-efficacy in their ability in contributing to patient-centered care in a multidisciplinary team.

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Baseline (Student Stereotype Rating)

  Measurement of participants stereotype towards other health disciplines was measured using the 9-items Student Stereotype Rating Questionnaire through a 5-point Likert scale (1=very low to 5= very high). The score ranges from 9 to 45 with higher scores indicating higher perceived ability of the particular healthcare discipline by the other discipline.

  Pre-test

• Post test (Change of Student Stereotype Rating from baseline)

  Measurement of participants stereotype towards other health disciplines was measured using the 9-items Student Stereotype Rating Questionnaire through a 5-point Likert scale (1=very low to 5= very high). The score ranges from 9 to 45 with higher scores indicating higher perceived ability of the particular healthcare discipline by the other discipline.

  Post-test (immediately after simulation training)

• Follow up (Change of Student Stereotype Rating from baseline and post test)

  Measurement of participants stereotype towards other health disciplines was measured using the 9-items Student Stereotype Rating Questionnaire through a 5-point Likert scale (1=very low to 5= very high). The score ranges from 9 to 45 with higher scores indicating higher perceived ability of the particular healthcare discipline by the other discipline.

  Follow-up (2-months after simulation training)

Study Arms (2)

Virtual Reality

EXPERIMENTAL

3D avatar in a virtual simulation environment

Other: Create Real-life Experience And Teamwork In Virtual Environment (CREATIVE)

Live Simulation

NO INTERVENTION

Live-based simulation in a simulation ward

Interventions

Create Real-life Experience And Teamwork In Virtual Environment (CREATIVE) OTHER

3D virtual hospital environment where participants can perform physical and social interaction and presence using avatars.

Virtual Reality

Eligibility Criteria

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

You may qualify if:

• i) Full time students undertaking National University of Singapore's
• Third or fourth year Bachelor of Science (Nursing)
• Third or fourth year Bachelor of Medicine \& Bachelor of Surgery
• ii) Completed acute care management modules

You may not qualify if:

• i) Does not voluntarily agree to join the study
• ii) Does not want their performance to be video-recorded

Sponsors & Collaborators

• National University of Singapore: lead

Study Sites (1)

National University of Singapore

Singapore, Singapore

Location

Related Publications (2)

• Liaw SY, Sutini, Chua WL, Tan JZ, Levett-Jones T, Ashokka B, Te Pan TL, Lau ST, Ignacio J. Desktop Virtual Reality Versus Face-to-Face Simulation for Team-Training on Stress Levels and Performance in Clinical Deterioration: a Randomised Controlled Trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Jan;38(1):67-73. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07557-7. Epub 2022 May 2.

  PMID: 35501626 DERIVED

• Liaw SY, Ooi SW, Rusli KDB, Lau TC, Tam WWS, Chua WL. Nurse-Physician Communication Team Training in Virtual Reality Versus Live Simulations: Randomized Controlled Trial on Team Communication and Teamwork Attitudes. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Apr 8;22(4):e17279. doi: 10.2196/17279.

  PMID: 32267235 DERIVED

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Associate Professor

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: March 26, 2020
• First Posted: April 2, 2020
• Study Start: July 1, 2018
• Primary Completion: December 31, 2019
• Study Completion: December 31, 2019
• Last Updated: April 3, 2020

Record last verified: 2020-04

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

SG (1)