Transfer of urethral catheterization (UC) skills from simulation training to performance on real clinical
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN90745002 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN90745002 |
| Secondary identifying numbers | H-1-2010-075 |
- Submission date
- 01/02/2012
- Registration date
- 20/02/2012
- Last edited
- 08/12/2015
- Recruitment status
- No longer recruiting
- Overall study status
- Completed
- Condition category
- Surgery
Plain English summary of protocol
Background and study aims
Urethral catheterisation (UC) is a procedure where a flexible tube called a catheter is inserted into a patient's bladder to collect urine. Inexperienced interns are responsible for most complications after UC. Although it is common to train using simulators, little is known about the transfer of learned skills to real clinical practice. The aim of this study is to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of a UC simulated skills training course on performance on real patients and to examine whether watching a video of the procedure immediately before assessment enhances performance.
Who can participate?
Third year students at University of Copenhagen medical school.
What does the study involve?
Participants attend a simulated skills training course covering the essential knowledge and skills needed to perform a UC. An experienced student teacher teaches the students in groups of maximum six. After a theoretical introduction, the major part of the course consists of practical training of UC on a mannequin with feedback from the teacher. After the UC course the students are tested using a mannequin. Their performance is videotaped and assessed afterwards. One to six weeks later, participants are scheduled to perform a UC on a real patient from a urological department. The UC procedure is assessed by direct observation by an experienced urology nurse, who could interrupt if anything potential harmful for the patient was going to happen.
What are the possible benefits and risks of participating?
There were no additional risks for the participants in our study.
When is the study starting and how long is it expected to run for?
May 2010 to March 2011
Where is the study run from?
University of Copenhagen (Denmark)
Who is funding the study?
University of Copenhagen (Denmark)
Who is the main contact?
Prof Charlotte Ringsted
charlotte.ringsted@rh.regionh.dk
Contact information
Scientific
Bomhoffs Have 8, 4. tv.
Copenhagen
1872
Denmark
| charlotte.ringsted@rh.regionh.dk |
Study information
| Study design | Single-centre randomized controlled trial |
|---|---|
| Primary study design | Interventional |
| Secondary study design | Randomised controlled trial |
| Study setting(s) | Hospital |
| Study type | Treatment |
| Participant information sheet | Not available in web format, please use the contact details below to request a patient information sheet |
| Scientific title | Transfer of urethral catheterization (UC) skills from simulation training to performance on real clinical: a randomized controlled trial of the additional effect of video instruction |
| Study objectives | The aims of the study were to investigate short- and long-term effects of simulated UC skills training on performance on real patients and the effect of watching an instructional video of the UC procedure immediately before the first clinical performance. |
| Ethics approval(s) | The National Committee on Health Research Ethics, Copenhagen, Denmark, 13/08/2012, ref: H-1-2010-075 |
| Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied | Medical education |
| Intervention | The participants were randomised to a video group or a control group when they arrived at the hospital for the transfer-test. The video group watched a five minutes long video instruction of urethral catheterization while the control group did not get any preparation before the test. The video illustrated a physician performing urethral catheterization on a real patient and a voice over to explain the difficult steps. |
| Intervention type | Procedure/Surgery |
| Primary outcome measure | Urethral catheterization performance on patients were assessed using a form with 15 items, each to be scored on a scale of 0-4, where 4 indicated best performance |
| Secondary outcome measures | An overall assessment in the form including five categories: poor, unacceptable, acceptable, good, and excellent performance |
| Overall study start date | 01/05/2010 |
| Completion date | 01/03/2011 |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Patient |
|---|---|
| Age group | Adult |
| Sex | Both |
| Target number of participants | Seventy-six medical students were enrolled in the main study. Twenty-eight medical students were invited to participate in the pilot study. |
| Key inclusion criteria | The participants were a volunteer sample of third year medical students at Copenhagen University. All students were invited by email to participate in the study and were included on a first come, first served principle |
| Key exclusion criteria | Students with previous clinical experience in performing UC |
| Date of first enrolment | 01/05/2010 |
| Date of final enrolment | 01/03/2011 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- Denmark
Study participating centre
1872
Denmark
Sponsor information
University/education
Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences
Undervisningskvalitetspulje for den kliniske undervisning
3B, Blegdamsvej
Copenhagen
2200
Denmark
| email@sund.ku.dk | |
| Website | http://sund.ku.dk/uddannelse/undervisningskvalitetspulje/ |
"ROR" |
https://ror.org/035b05819 |
Funders
Funder type
University/education
Government organisation / Universities (academic only)
- Alternative name(s)
- university_of_copenhagen, Københavns Universitet - University of Copenhagen, University of Copenhagen (UCPH), Copenhagen University, Københavns Universitet – Københavns Universitet, University of Copenhagen (KU), Denmark, Københavns Universitet – University of Copenaghen (UCPH), koebenhavns_uni, Københavns Uni, University of Copenhagen, KU, UCPH
- Location
- Denmark
Results and Publications
| Intention to publish date | |
|---|---|
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | No |
| IPD sharing plan summary | Not provided at time of registration |
| Publication and dissemination plan | Not provided at time of registration |
| IPD sharing plan |
Study outputs
| Output type | Details | Date created | Date added | Peer reviewed? | Patient-facing? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results article | results | 25/02/2013 | Yes | No |
