Traditional In-Person Vs. Remote AR Clinical Simulation

Stanford University42 enrolled

Overview

This is a non-inferiority, international, controlled trial that aims to evaluate the progression of physicians and residents through an Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) clinical simulated scenario. The study's primary objective is to compare the performance outcomes between two groups: participants in the traditional in-person simulation and those immersed in the Augmented Reality (AR) scenario

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

SUPPORTIVE_CARE

Masking

NONE

Enrollment

Conditions

Educational Problems

Interventions

Augmented Reality simulationBEHAVIORAL

Augmented simulation of medical crisis scenarios

In Person simulationBEHAVIORAL

In Person simulation of medical crisis scenarios

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 18 YearsMax age: 99 Years

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * Brazilian resident Exclusion Criteria: * a history of severe motion sickness * currently have nausea * a history of seizures * wear corrective glasses.

Locations (1)

Lucile Parkard Children's Hospital

Stanford, California, United States

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Evaluation of Technical Skill (TS) and Non Technical Skill (NTS) Performance

Measured with Instrument for the evaluation of advanced life support performance. The instrument consists of 26 items, which are rated on a scale from +2 to -2. A total assessment score of performance is given based on a scale from 0 to 10 (0=poor, 10=excellent) at the end of the instrument.

Time frame: immediately after simulation

Secondary Outcomes

Reassessment of Non Technical Skill (NTS) with Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS)

Measured with individual Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS). The BARS scoring system uses four categories assessing situation awareness, decision-making, communication and teamwork. The score ranges from 1 and 9 (1 = poor and 9 = excellent)

Time frame: immediately after simulation

Evaluation of the AR system's usability

Measured with the System Usability Scale (SUS). The scale has 10 items. Scores ranges from 1-5 (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree)

Time frame: immediately after simulation

Evaluation of the AR system's ergonomics

Measured with the ISO 9241-400 Assessment of human-ergonomic factors. The scale has 6 items. Scores ranges from 1-5 (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree)

Time frame: immediately after simulation

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.