Simulation-based Training for Ultrasound-guided Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block
1 other identifier
interventional
40
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The goal of this study is to evaluate whether remote asynchronous feedback is non-inferior to direct synchronous feedback during simulation-based training for ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block performance. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does asynchronous feedback achieve technical skill acquisition outcomes comparable to direct synchronous feedback? Can asynchronous feedback optimize teaching resources without compromising training quality? Researchers will compare two feedback modalities within a simulation-based training program for deliberate practice of ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block techniques. Participants will: Receive training with either direct synchronous feedback or remote asynchronous feedback Perform simulation-based deliberate practice sessions Be assessed using validated instruments for technical skill performance
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable
Started May 2026
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
May 28, 2026
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
May 28, 2026
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 22, 2026
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
December 27, 2026
ExpectedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
March 27, 2027
June 22, 2026
May 1, 2026
7 months
May 28, 2026
June 16, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Performance assessment
The PRE and POST assessments were videotaped for evaluation by 2 independent and blinded reviewers. The simulation center staff recorded the assessment videos for a standard vision of the participant's hands and the ultrasound image. Two reviewers rated each resident's performance using an specific GRS previously validated. The reviewers were different from the instructors.
8 weeks
Secondary Outcomes (1)
ICSAD measurement
8 weeks
Study Arms (2)
Synchronous direct feedback (SYNC)
ACTIVE COMPARATORThe control group practiced with synchronous direct feedback (SYNC). The SYNC group attended the simulation laboratory for practice sessions. Residents were scheduled to practice with the instructor in a one-to-one ses- sion. The instructor was present during all the sessions and gave instructions and feedback in real time throughout all sessions (traditional face-to-face feedback modality).
Asynchronous distance feedback (ASYNC).
EXPERIMENTALThe experimental group practiced with asynchronous distance feedback (ASYNC). Residents scheduled their sessions and attended the simulation laboratory alone. The resident logged in to the C1DO1 platform.The student recorded himself, performing the observed technique. The instructor was not present and provided feedback asynchronously via a C1DO1 platform. The ASYNC included texts, audio recordings, drawings annotating the trainee's video, and short example error videos from a library. In addition to the specific feedback in response to residents' videos, instructors also provided an objective assessment based on scores using a 9-item global rating scale (GRS). The student reviewed their feedback in the platform and identified the skills to improve for the next session.
Interventions
The experimental group practiced with ASYNC. Residents sched- uled their sessions and attended the simulation laboratory alone. The resident logged in to the C1DO1 platform. In the platform, the second 4 stages were practical exercises. The student recorded himself, performing the observed technique.9 The instructor was not present and provided feedback asynchronously via a C1DO1 platform. The ASYNC included texts, audio recordings, drawings annotating the trainee's video, and short example error videos from a library. In addition to the specific feedback in response to residents' videos, instructors also provided an objective assessment based on scores using a 9-item global rating scale (GRS). The student reviewed their feedback in the platform and identified the skills to improve for the next session.
The control group practiced with SYNC. The SYNC group attended the simulation laboratory for practice sessions. Residents were scheduled to practice with the instructor in a one-to-one ses- sion. The instructor was present during all the sessions and gave instructions and feedback in real time throughout all sessions (traditional face-to-face feedback modality).
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Medicine students
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
Santiago, Santiago Metropolitan, 7700950, Chile
Related Publications (2)
Miranda PF, Araneda AL, Molina NP, Miranda FG, Morrison C, Corvetto MA, Altermatt FR. Simulated-based training for ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block: determining the learning curve and transference to real patient. Adv Simul (Lond). 2025 Nov 11;10(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s41077-025-00389-5.
PMID: 41219804BACKGROUNDCorvetto MA, Kattan E, Ramirez G, Besa P, Abbott E, Zamorano E, Contreras V, Altermatt FR. Simulation-Based Training Program for Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Placement: Randomized Comparative Study of in-Person Training With Synchronous Feedback Versus Distance Training With Asynchronous Feedback. Simul Healthc. 2024 Dec 1;19(6):373-378. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000805. Epub 2024 Jun 17.
PMID: 38888993BACKGROUND
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- INVESTIGATOR
- Masking Details
- The video assessment will be done by 2 blinded instructors (blinded to the group assignment of participants)
- Purpose
- OTHER
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
May 28, 2026
First Posted
June 22, 2026
Study Start
May 28, 2026
Primary Completion (Estimated)
December 27, 2026
Study Completion (Estimated)
March 27, 2027
Last Updated
June 22, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-05
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share