Clinical Performance and Multitasking in Anesthesia : a Simulation-based Study

NCT07615582 | Not Yet Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: RNIPH-2026-CESAR-FOCUS
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 35
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Cognitive failure under multitasking conditions has been demonstrated in various settings, including healthcare. However, in anesthesiology, the impact of multitasking on clinical performance has not yet been fully characterized. The objective of our study is to evaluate the impact of multitasking on anesthesiologists' clinical performance in a simulated setting.

Conditions

Clinical Performance; Simulation Training; Simulation Based Medical Education; Clinical Reasoning; Anesthesia; Multitasking Behavior and Multitasking Ability

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Concordance score with the expert panel on a Script Concordance Test (SCT)

  Each item of the SCT is scored out of 1 point, and the sum of the points, converted to a 100-point scale, defines the percentage of concordance with the expert panel.

  At two time points: - During simulation session under multitasking conditions - During control visit under quiet conditions

Secondary Outcomes (4)

• Manual ventilation performance assessed by variance of expiratory tidal volume (ml)

  - Training before simulation: baseline - During simulation: ventilation only, ventilation plus clinical questions

• Manual ventilation performance assessed by variance of respiratory rate (cycles/minute)

  - Training before simulation: baseline - During simulation: ventilation only, ventilation plus clinical questions

• Cognitive load assessed by the NASA-TLX index (score out of 100)

  A two time points: - Evaluating cognitive load of manual ventilation alone, before simulation after training. - Evaluation cognitive load of multitasking, at the end of the simulation session

• Time to answer items of the script concordance test (seconds)

  Two time points: intervention and control.

Other Outcomes (3)

• Exploratory sub-group analysis of the primary outcome measure

  Two time points: intervention and control.

• Exploratory subgroup analyses of expiratory tidal volume variance and respiratory rate variance

  - Training before simulation: baseline - During simulation: ventilation only, ventilation plus clinical questions

• Descriptive analysis of ventilation parameters

  Training phase (baseline), simulation phase (ventilation-only and ventilation plus clinical questions)

Interventions

Multitasking OTHER

Simulation training session during which participants will be required to multitask by performing manual mask ventilation on a manikin while answering oral clinical questions administered in the form of Script Concordance Tests (SCTs).

Eligibility Criteria

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

Study Population

The study population consists of a sample of anesthesiology and intensive care physicians working at Grenoble University Hospital.

You may qualify if:

• Anesthesiology and intensive care resident or attending physician
• Written informed consent

You may not qualify if:

• None

Sponsors & Collaborators

• University Hospital, Grenoble: lead

Study Sites (1)

Centre d'Évaluation et de Simulation Alpes Recherche (CESAR)

Grenoble, 38700, France

Location

Related Publications (7)

• Sujka JA, Safcsak K, Bhullar IS, Havron WS 3rd. Simulation-Based Testing of Pager Interruptions During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. J Surg Educ. 2018 Sep-Oct;75(5):1351-1356. doi: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2018.01.012. Epub 2018 Feb 1.

  PMID: 29396277 BACKGROUND

• Murji A, Luketic L, Sobel ML, Kulasegaram KM, Leyland N, Posner G. Evaluating the effect of distractions in the operating room on clinical decision-making and patient safety. Surg Endosc. 2016 Oct;30(10):4499-504. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4782-4. Epub 2016 Feb 19.

  PMID: 26895919 BACKGROUND

• McCurdie T, Sanderson P, Aitken LM. Traditions of research into interruptions in healthcare: A conceptual review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2017 Jan;66:23-36. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.11.005. Epub 2016 Nov 10.

  PMID: 27951432 BACKGROUND

• Adams TN, Rho JC. Multitasking simulation: Present application and future directions. Med Teach. 2017 Feb;39(2):120-122. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2016.1230666. Epub 2016 Sep 15.

  PMID: 27633071 BACKGROUND

• Jackson KM, Shaw TH, Helton WS. Evaluating the dual-task decrement within a simulated environment: Word recall and visual search. Appl Ergon. 2023 Jan;106:103861. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103861. Epub 2022 Aug 20.

  PMID: 35998391 BACKGROUND

• Westbrook JI, Woods A, Rob MI, Dunsmuir WT, Day RO. Association of interruptions with an increased risk and severity of medication administration errors. Arch Intern Med. 2010 Apr 26;170(8):683-90. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.65.

  PMID: 20421552 BACKGROUND

• Gui JL, Nemergut EC, Forkin KT. Distraction in the operating room: A narrative review of environmental and self-initiated distractions and their effect on anesthesia providers. J Clin Anesth. 2021 Feb;68:110110. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.110110. Epub 2020 Oct 16.

  PMID: 33075633 BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Multitasking Behavior

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Behavior

Central Study Contacts

Jean-Noël Evain, MD, PhD

CONTACT

+33476766829; jnevain@chu-grenoble.fr

Caroline Sanchez, PhD

CONTACT

0476766829; csanchez5@chu-grenoble.fr

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: OTHER
• Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: May 22, 2026
• First Posted: May 29, 2026
• Study Start: June 1, 2026
• Primary Completion (Estimated): December 1, 2026
• Study Completion (Estimated): December 1, 2026
• Last Updated: June 10, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-06

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

FR (1)