Trial Outcomes & Findings for The Learning Outcome of Resuscitation Teamwork Training in Postgraduate Year Doctors and Nurses (NCT NCT05302414)
NCT ID: NCT05302414
Last Updated: 2024-11-22
Results Overview
The assessment of the medical team's teamwork performance was conducted using the Team Performance Observation Tool, which includes a 23-item rating checklist. This checklist is divided into five categories: team structure (four items), leadership (six items), communication (four items), situation monitoring (five items), and mutual support (four items). Scores for each item range from 1 (Very Poor) to 5 (Excellent), resulting in a cumulative score between 23 and 115. A higher score indicates better teamwork performance.
COMPLETED
NA
124 participants
Pretest at the 0 week, posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks, and follow-up test at the 16 weeks.
2024-11-22
Participant Flow
The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Board Game-based Learning
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
Lecture-based Learning
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Pretest to Posttest
STARTED
|
44
|
40
|
40
|
|
Pretest to Posttest
COMPLETED
|
32
|
32
|
32
|
|
Pretest to Posttest
NOT COMPLETED
|
12
|
8
|
8
|
|
Posttest to Three Months Follow-up
STARTED
|
32
|
32
|
32
|
|
Posttest to Three Months Follow-up
COMPLETED
|
16
|
16
|
16
|
|
Posttest to Three Months Follow-up
NOT COMPLETED
|
16
|
16
|
16
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Board Game-based Learning
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
Lecture-based Learning
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Pretest to Posttest
Lost to Follow-up
|
12
|
8
|
8
|
|
Posttest to Three Months Follow-up
Lost to Follow-up
|
16
|
16
|
16
|
Baseline Characteristics
The Learning Outcome of Resuscitation Teamwork Training in Postgraduate Year Doctors and Nurses
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
Lecture-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Total
n=96 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
6 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
19 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
|
32 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
32 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
32 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
96 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Age, Continuous
|
25.63 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.16 • n=5 Participants
|
24.31 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.49 • n=7 Participants
|
24.97 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.04 • n=5 Participants
|
24.97 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.3 • n=4 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
26 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
27 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
77 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Working experience (months)
0-6 months
|
6 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
15 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
34 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Working experience (months)
7-12 months
|
11 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
11 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
35 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Working experience (months)
13-18 months
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Working experience (months)
19-24 months
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Education
Associate or below
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Education
Bachelor or above
|
30 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
31 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
31 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
92 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Units
Medical Ward
|
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
6 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
18 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Units
Surgical Ward
|
9 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
18 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Units
Special Unit
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
18 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Units
Operating Room
|
3 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
9 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
10 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Units
Others
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
20 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Resuscitation experience (times after work)
1
|
6 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Resuscitation experience (times after work)
≤ 5
|
9 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Resuscitation experience (times after work)
≥5
|
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
6 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
Resuscitation experience (times after work)
No
|
13 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
18 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
ACLS/BLS certification
Yes
|
24 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
30 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
28 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
|
ACLS/BLS certification
No
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Pretest at the 0 week, posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks, and follow-up test at the 16 weeks.Population: The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48. For participants who did not complete the study, the reasons included scheduling conflicts, staffing shortages in clinical settings, and surge in COVID-19 outbreak.
The assessment of the medical team's teamwork performance was conducted using the Team Performance Observation Tool, which includes a 23-item rating checklist. This checklist is divided into five categories: team structure (four items), leadership (six items), communication (four items), situation monitoring (five items), and mutual support (four items). Scores for each item range from 1 (Very Poor) to 5 (Excellent), resulting in a cumulative score between 23 and 115. A higher score indicates better teamwork performance.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Lecture-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Team Performance Observation Tool
Posttest
|
51.50 score on a scale
Interval 46.88 to 65.0
|
57.75 score on a scale
Interval 53.38 to 62.13
|
56.50 score on a scale
Interval 49.63 to 59.88
|
|
Team Performance Observation Tool
Pretest
|
39.25 score on a scale
Interval 35.75 to 53.5
|
53.00 score on a scale
Interval 47.0 to 59.0
|
39.00 score on a scale
Interval 37.63 to 48.5
|
|
Team Performance Observation Tool
Three months follow-up
|
57.25 score on a scale
Interval 49.13 to 68.0
|
62.50 score on a scale
Interval 46.63 to 67.5
|
56.75 score on a scale
Interval 44.38 to 62.75
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Pretest at the 0 week, posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks, and follow-up test at the 16 weeks.Population: The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48. For participants who did not complete the study, the reasons included scheduling conflicts, staffing shortages in clinical settings, and surge in COVID-19 outbreak.
The "Knowledge of Teamwork" assessment, aimed at evaluating healthcare professionals' understanding of teamwork knowledge, consists of 23 multiple-choice items based on the Team Strategies and Tools to Enhance Performance and Patient Safety (TeamSTEPPS) Learning Benchmarks provided by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Each item is formulated as a statement that participants must evaluate as true or false, choosing from five available answer options, of which only one is correct. Participants earn one point for each correct response, with no points awarded for incorrect answers, resulting in a total possible score of 0 to 23. A higher score signifies a more comprehensive understanding of the principles of teamwork knowledge.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Lecture-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Knowledge of Teamwork Assessment
Pretest
|
17.00 score on a scale
Interval 15.25 to 19.75
|
18.00 score on a scale
Interval 16.0 to 19.0
|
17.00 score on a scale
Interval 16.0 to 19.0
|
|
Knowledge of Teamwork Assessment
Posttest
|
20.00 score on a scale
Interval 17.0 to 21.0
|
19.00 score on a scale
Interval 17.0 to 20.0
|
18.00 score on a scale
Interval 16.0 to 19.0
|
|
Knowledge of Teamwork Assessment
Three months follow-up
|
19.50 score on a scale
Interval 16.0 to 20.0
|
19.00 score on a scale
Interval 17.25 to 19.75
|
19.00 score on a scale
Interval 18.0 to 19.95
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Pretest at the 0 week, posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks, and follow-up test at the 16 weeks.Population: The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48. For participants who did not complete the study, the reasons included scheduling conflicts, staffing shortages in clinical settings, and surge in COVID-19 outbreak.
The attitudes of healthcare professionals toward interprofessional collaboration were assessed using the 'Interprofessional Collaboration Scale' (IPC), which consists of 26 items. The Interprofessional Collaboration Scale covers three main aspects: communication, accommodation, and isolation. We adopted the first 13 items because they are relevant to medical and nursing professional backgrounds. The scale ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree), with total scores ranging from 13 to 52. A higher score indicates a more positive attitude toward interprofessional collaboration.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Lecture-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Interprofessional Collaboration Scale
Pretest
|
38.00 score on a scale
Interval 36.0 to 41.0
|
36.00 score on a scale
Interval 35.0 to 41.0
|
40.00 score on a scale
Interval 36.0 to 46.0
|
|
Interprofessional Collaboration Scale
Posttest
|
39.00 score on a scale
Interval 37.0 to 45.5
|
41.00 score on a scale
Interval 37.5 to 45.0
|
45.00 score on a scale
Interval 38.0 to 50.0
|
|
Interprofessional Collaboration Scale
Three months follow-up
|
38.50 score on a scale
Interval 37.0 to 48.25
|
40.00 score on a scale
Interval 39.0 to 47.75
|
43.00 score on a scale
Interval 37.0 to 50.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Pretest at the 0 week, posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks, and follow-up test at the 16 weeks.Population: The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48. For participants who did not complete the study, the reasons included scheduling conflicts, staffing shortages in clinical settings, and surge in COVID-19 outbreak.
The healthcare professionals' resuscitation medical knowledge was assessed using the 'Adavance Cardiac Life Support Precourse Self-Assessment,' which consisted of 60 items. The assessment covered three main aspects: rhythm identification, pharmacology, and practical application. We selected 20 items related to resuscitation medical management (ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrilation, asystole, pulseless electrical activity). The total score ranged from 0 (minimum) to 20 (maximum), with higher scores indicating a better understanding of resuscitation medical knowledge.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Lecture-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Resuscitation Knowledge Scale
Posttest
|
11.00 score on a scale
Interval 8.0 to 13.0
|
11.00 score on a scale
Interval 8.0 to 13.0
|
11.00 score on a scale
Interval 8.25 to 13.0
|
|
Resuscitation Knowledge Scale
Pretest
|
7.00 score on a scale
Interval 5.25 to 10.5
|
7.00 score on a scale
Interval 5.25 to 10.0
|
8.00 score on a scale
Interval 6.0 to 9.0
|
|
Resuscitation Knowledge Scale
Three months follow-up
|
7.50 score on a scale
Interval 6.25 to 10.75
|
8.50 score on a scale
Interval 6.25 to 10.0
|
7.00 score on a scale
Interval 5.25 to 10.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Pretest at the 0 week, posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks, and follow-up test at the 16 weeks.Population: The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48. For participants who did not complete the study, the reasons included scheduling conflicts, staffing shortages in clinical settings, and surge in COVID-19 outbreak.
The medical team's resuscitation management performance was assessed using the "Medical Task Performance" checklist. The checklist items were referenced from the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Twenty items were identified by an expert panel based on the resuscitation guidelines, including applying adequate oxygen according to the patient's dynamic condition, timely identification of cardiac arrest and provision of high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation, identification of shockable rhythms and delivery of timely and correct shocks, and correct administration of resuscitation medication. The checklist was rated on a dichotomous scale with scores of 2 (complete), 1 (partial), and 0 (incomplete). The total score ranged from 0 (minimum) to 40 (maximum), with higher scores indicating better resuscitation management performance by the medical team.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Lecture-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Medical Task Performance
Pretest
|
22.00 score on a scale
Interval 15.38 to 28.25
|
23.00 score on a scale
Interval 16.38 to 25.38
|
13.25 score on a scale
Interval 10.75 to 17.75
|
|
Medical Task Performance
Posttest
|
27.00 score on a scale
Interval 23.38 to 32.25
|
29.00 score on a scale
Interval 25.13 to 31.38
|
27.25 score on a scale
Interval 24.88 to 30.75
|
|
Medical Task Performance
Three months follow-up
|
22.00 score on a scale
Interval 13.25 to 34.88
|
29.25 score on a scale
Interval 21.13 to 30.63
|
28.50 score on a scale
Interval 23.25 to 30.75
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: The posttest right after intervention at the 4 weeks.Population: The total number of participants was 124, with 28 did not complete the pretest, resulting in 96 people completed pretest, intervention and posttest. Subsequently, 48 participants did not complete three-months follow up test , the total number of participants who completed the whole course reduced to 48. For participants who did not complete the study, the reasons included scheduling conflicts, staffing shortages in clinical settings, and surge in COVID-19 outbreak.
The learning cognitive load of healthcare professionals was assessed using the 'Chinese Version of the Learning Cognitive Load Questionnaire,' which consists of 8 items. The questionnaire encompasses two main aspects: mental load and mental effort. The scale ranges from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 6 (Strongly Agree), with a total score from 6 (minimun) to 48 (maximun). A higher score indicates a higher learning cognitive load.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Lecture-based Learning
n=31 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through an interactive lecture-based learning approach.
|
Board-game Based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a board game-based teaching approach.
|
Simulation-based Learning
n=32 Participants
The team of PGY doctors and nurses received training in resuscitation teamwork skills through a simulation-based teaching approach.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Learning Cognitive Load
|
21.00 score on a scale
Interval 16.0 to 28.0
|
22.00 score on a scale
Interval 16.5 to 28.5
|
22.00 score on a scale
Interval 15.25 to 27.0
|
Adverse Events
Board-game Based Learning
Simulation-based Learning
Lecture-based Learning
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Hui-Wen Chen Phd candidate
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Department of Nursing
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place