Trial Outcomes & Findings for Ageing and Acute Care Physicians' Performance (NCT NCT02683447)
NCT ID: NCT02683447
Last Updated: 2025-01-20
Results Overview
Ottawa GRS score correlated with chronological age. The Ottawa GRS assesses non-technical CRM skills on a 7-point scale (minimum 1, maximum 7), with higher scores indicating better performance.
COMPLETED
48 participants
After managing first simulation scenario - Day 1
2025-01-20
Participant Flow
Participant milestones
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
48
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
46
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
2
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Lost to Follow-up
|
2
|
Baseline Characteristics
Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant.
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Previous Full-body Manikin Simulation Scenarios Completed
16-20
|
0 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Previous Full-body Manikin Simulation Scenarios Completed
>20
|
4 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
What Percentage of Practice Time do you Manage ACLS Crises?
0-10%
|
36 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
What Percentage of Practice Time do you Manage ACLS Crises?
11-20%
|
9 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
What Percentage of Practice Time do you Manage ACLS Crises?
21-30%
|
0 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
What Percentage of Practice Time do you Manage ACLS Crises?
31-40%
|
1 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
What Percentage of Practice Time do you Manage ACLS Crises?
41-50%
|
0 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
What Percentage of Practice Time do you Manage ACLS Crises?
>50%
|
2 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Have you ever been an ACLS Instructor?
Yes
|
10 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Have you ever been an ACLS Instructor?
No
|
38 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Age, Continuous
|
49.5 years
n=48 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
20 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
28 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Age, Categorical
<45
|
15 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Age, Categorical
45-54
|
20 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Age, Categorical
55-64
|
10 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Age, Categorical
65+
|
3 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Biological Age, Continuous
|
43.4 years
n=48 Participants
|
|
Biological Age, Categorical
<45
|
32 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Biological Age, Categorical
45-54
|
9 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Biological Age, Categorical
55-64
|
4 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Biological Age, Categorical
65+
|
3 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Enrollment Site
University of Toronto
|
34 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Enrollment Site
University of Ottawa
|
14 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Specialty
Anesthesia
|
35 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Specialty
Emergency
|
8 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Specialty
Intensive care
|
5 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Years in Practice
0-10
|
10 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Years in Practice
11-20
|
20 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Years in Practice
21-30
|
13 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Years in Practice
31-40
|
4 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Years in Practice
41-50
|
0 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Years in Practice
>50
|
1 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Previous Full-body Manikin Simulation Scenarios Completed
0-5
|
28 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Previous Full-body Manikin Simulation Scenarios Completed
6-10
|
9 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
|
Previous Full-body Manikin Simulation Scenarios Completed
11-15
|
7 Participants
n=48 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: After managing first simulation scenario - Day 1Ottawa GRS score correlated with chronological age. The Ottawa GRS assesses non-technical CRM skills on a 7-point scale (minimum 1, maximum 7), with higher scores indicating better performance.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
CRM Performance During First Sim Scenario Assessed by Ottawa Global Rating Scale (GRS)
|
-0.299 Pearson correlation coefficient
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: After managing first simulation scenario - Day 1ACLS (Advanced Cardiac Life Support) score will be correlated with chronological age. Items on the checklist were separated into two components: 1) the ACLS correct score (minimum score 0, maximum score 30), where higher scores indicate better performance, and 2) the ACLS risk score (minimum score 0, maximum score 17) where higher scores indicate worse performance.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
CRM Performance During First Sim Scenario Assessed by ACLS Checklist
ACLS correct score
|
-0.438 Pearson correlation coefficient
|
|
CRM Performance During First Sim Scenario Assessed by ACLS Checklist
ACLS risk score
|
0.143 Pearson correlation coefficient
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After managing second simulation scenario - Day 1Ottawa GRS score will be compared to score in first scenario to look for improvement. The Ottawa GRS assesses non-technical CRM skills on a 7-point scale (minimum 1, maximum 7), with higher scores indicating better performance. The mean difference in GRS score between pre-test (scenario 1) and immediate post-test (scenario 2) is reported.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Learning From High-fidelity Simulation Education Assessed by Ottawa Global Rating Scale
|
2.28 Score on a scale
Interval 1.14 to 3.42
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After managing second simulation scenario - Day 1ACLS (Advanced Cardiac Life Support) score will be compared to score in first scenario to look for improvement. Items on the checklist were separated into two components: 1) the ACLS correct score (minimum score 0, maximum score 30), where higher scores indicate better performance, and 2) the ACLS risk score (minimum score 0, maximum score 17) where higher scores indicate worse performance. The mean difference in ACLS score between pre-test (scenario 1) and immediate post-test (scenario 2) is reported.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Learning From High-fidelity Simulation Education Assessed by ACLS Checklist
ACLS correct score
|
1.69 Score on a scale
Interval 0.78 to 2.56
|
|
Learning From High-fidelity Simulation Education Assessed by ACLS Checklist
ACLS risk score
|
-1.09 Score on a scale
Interval -1.54 to -0.64
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: 3 months after completing first two scenarios - Day 90Ottawa GRS score will be compared to score in second scenario on Day 1 to look for improvement. The Ottawa GRS assesses non-technical CRM skills on a 7-point scale (minimum 1, maximum 7), with higher scores indicating better performance. The mean difference in GRS score between immediate post-test (scenario 2) and retention post-test (scenario 3) is reported.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Retention of Learning From Simulation as Assessed by Ottawa Global Rating Scale
|
-0.38 Score on a scale
Interval -1.45 to 0.69
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: 3 months after completing first two scenarios - Day 90ACLS (Advanced Cardiac Life Support) score will be compared to score in second scenario on Day 1 to look for improvement. Items on the checklist were separated into two components: 1) the ACLS correct score (minimum score 0, maximum score 30), where higher scores indicate better performance, and 2) the ACLS risk score (minimum score 0, maximum score 17) where higher scores indicate worse performance. The mean difference in ACLS score between immediate post-test (scenario 2) and retention post-test (scenario 3) is reported.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
CRM Simulation
n=48 Participants
Each participant will manage a PEA arrest scenario (pre-test) and then be debriefed on their CRM skills by a trained facilitator for 20 minutes. They will then manage another crisis scenario (PEA arrest with a different inciting event) as an immediate post-test. Three months afterwards participants will return to manage a third PEA arrest scenario, which will serve as a retention post-test.
|
|---|---|
|
Retention of Learning From Simulation as Assessed by ACLS Checklist
ACLS correct score
|
-0.34 Score on a scale
Interval -1.31 to 0.64
|
|
Retention of Learning From Simulation as Assessed by ACLS Checklist
ACLS risk score
|
0.30 Score on a scale
Interval -0.06 to 0.67
|
Adverse Events
CRM Simulation
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place