A Comparative Study Between Simulation-based and Problem-based Learning in Difficult Airway Management Workshop
NCT ID: NCT02993393
Last Updated: 2016-12-15
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
50 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2015-08-31
2017-02-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Material and Methods After IRB approval No. 369/2558(EC3). A prospective, questionnaires-based study was performed amongst volunteered, consent-signed, 10 anesthesiologists and 40 nurse anesthetist students. After stratified randomization, ten students simultaneously attended either SBL or PBL course one at a time. Six weeks later, a crossover technique was applied for both groups. At the end of project, teachers and students had to response to Likert's scale questionnaires.
The teachers' questionnaire based on table of specification of the learning contents, consisted of 4 parts: airway evaluation, patient preparation, strategic planning and follow up care. The students' questionnaire comprised 3 parts: learning content, process and evaluation.
The validation of the questionnaire was determined by three board-certified anesthesiologists. The index of item objective congruence was 0.80 and 0.82 with Cronbach's Alpha of 0.97 and 0.92 respectively.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Simulation-based learning in medicine utilizes aides such as manikins or actors to replicate clinical scenarios. It yields the acquisition of skills through deliberate practice rather than an apprentice style of learning 22. However, problem-based learning is a small group discussions where students are active, learner-centered, or self-directed learning to the topic assignments. Teachers play role as moderators or facilitators 21.
Teaching and learning in airway management are essential in anesthetic field. The personnel need to be keen both basic and advance knowledge owing to its applications to the benefits of patients' life. At present, the diversity of learning techniques (PBL and SBL) allows sophisticated devices as an interactive learning tool to cope with all difficulties in details.
Nevertheless, neither PBL nor SBL manifests the superior benefit of instructional process and learning content xx. Chin KL, et al. (2014) concluded that simulation was superior to case-based learning in teaching diabetic ketoacidosis and thyroid storm to the final-year, undergraduate pharmacy students. Randolph H, et al. (2006) revealed that students who learned critical assessment and management skills using full-scale, high- fidelity simulation, performed better than students who acquired similar skills in an interactive problem-based learning format.
As either PBL or SBL on difficult airway management is based upon the same table of specifications and experienced instructors. We would like to compare the teachers' and students' attitudes on these two learning methods.
Objectives To compare between PBL and SBL in terms of learning content, instructional and evaluation methods
Material and Methods After IRB approval No. 369/2558(EC3). A prospective, questionnaires-based study was performed amongst 40 volunteered, consent-signed nurse anesthetist students. The inclusion criteria for teachers were anesthesiologists who have involved in SBL and PBL with more than 3 years of experience in teaching. The inclusion criteria for students were nurse anesthetist students in the academic years of 2015. The exclusion criteria of both groups were ones who did not fit all qualifications.
After stratified randomization, ten nurse anesthetist students attended either SBL or PBL course one at a time. The one-day workshops were performed simultaneously. Six weeks later, a crossover technique was applied for both groups. At the end of project, teachers and students had to response to Likert's scale questionnaires: 4 = very suitable, 3 = suitable, 2 = unsuitable, 1 = very unsuitable.
The teachers' questionnaire based on table of specification of the learning contents, consisted of 4 parts: airway evaluation (history taking and physical examination), patient preparation (equipments and experienced helpers), 5 strategic planning (facemask ventilation, supraglottic airway device, laryngoscopy, tracheal intubation and failed intubation) and follow up care (documentation and informative advice).
On the other hand, the students' questionnaires comprised 3 parts: learning content, process and evaluation.
The correctness and appropriateness of the questionnaires (content validity) were determined by three board-certified anesthesiologists who had at least ten year experiences in anesthesia and were not involved in the project. The tryout was performed by ten novice nurse anesthetists and five anesthesiologists on students' and teachers' matters respectively. The index of item objective congruence was 0.80 and 0.82 with Cronbach's Alpha of 0.97 and 0.92 respectively. We used percentage, mean, standard deviation and student t-Test for data analysis at the significant level of 0.05 with 95% confident interval.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Teachers
Anesthesiologists who have involved in SBL and PBL with more than 3 years of experience in teaching
Teacher
The teachers' questionnaire based on table of specification of the learning contents, consisted of 4 parts: airway evaluation, patient preparation, strategic planning and follow up care.
Students
Students were nurse anesthetist students in the academic years of 2015
Student
The students' questionnaire comprised 3 parts: learning content, process and evaluation.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Teacher
The teachers' questionnaire based on table of specification of the learning contents, consisted of 4 parts: airway evaluation, patient preparation, strategic planning and follow up care.
Student
The students' questionnaire comprised 3 parts: learning content, process and evaluation.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* nurse anesthetist students in the academic years of 2015.
Exclusion Criteria
25 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Siriraj Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Mrs.Parichad Apidechakul
Nurse anesthetist
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mrs.Parichad Apidechakul, MPA. B.Ns.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Parichad Apidechakul
Nonthaburi, Changwat Nonthaburi, Thailand
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Parichad Apidechakul, B.Ns.M.P. A.
Role: primary
Phongthara Vijitvejpaisal, M.D.Ph.D.
Role: backup
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Reilly A, Spratt C. The perceptions of undergraduate student nurses of high-fidelity simulation-based learning: a case report from the University of Tasmania. Nurse Educ Today. 2007 Aug;27(6):542-50. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.08.015. Epub 2006 Oct 25.
Rowan CJ, McCourt C, Beake S. Problem based learning in midwifery--the students' perspective. Nurse Educ Today. 2008 Jan;28(1):93-9. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2007.02.014. Epub 2007 May 11.
Lorello GR, Cook DA, Johnson RL, Brydges R. Simulation-based training in anaesthesiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2014 Feb;112(2):231-45. doi: 10.1093/bja/aet414. Epub 2013 Dec 23.
Chilkoti G, Mohta M, Wadhwa R, Saxena AK. Problem-based learning research in anesthesia teaching: current status and future perspective. Anesthesiol Res Pract. 2014;2014:263948. doi: 10.1155/2014/263948. Epub 2014 May 29.
Al-Elq AH. Simulation-based medical teaching and learning. J Family Community Med. 2010 Jan;17(1):35-40. doi: 10.4103/1319-1683.68787.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
369/2558(EC3)
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id