Skip to content

A Remotely Supported Pediatric Simulation-Based Procedural Training Curriculum for EMS Clinicians

A Remotely Supported Pediatric Simulation-Based Procedural Training Curriculum for EMS Clinicians: Partnering PECCs and Pediatric Experts at a Distance

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07307573
Enrollment
133
Registered
2025-12-29
Start date
2021-06-14
Completion date
2022-06-30
Last updated
2025-12-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Education, Emergency Medical Services

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to study and compare the efficacy and feasibility of a remotely supported simulation-based procedural curriculum for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) clinicians.

Detailed description

This study transitioned a previously reported, traditional, simulation-based training curriculum delivered by on-site pediatric simulation experts, into a program delivered by agency Pediatric Emergency Care Coordinators (PECCs) supported by remote pediatric experts. The PECCs delivered the curriculum on site, and submitted first-person-view videos captured using a head-mounted camera of three procedures (bag-valve mask \[BVM\] ventilation, supraglottic device \[SGD\] insertion, and intraosseous \[IO\] catheterization) to pediatric education experts who provided scoring and feedback to the participants. The team tracked scores for all three procedures during the study period, compared scores to the previous study's, and solicited feedback from the PECCs and participants regarding these educational methods.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALeducation

pediatric emergency care coordinator provided education on each procedure performed

Sponsors

National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
CollaboratorNIH
Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

all participants received the same educational intervention

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* all full-time or part-time EMS clinicians at the recruited agencies with BVM ventilation, SGD placement, and/or IO catheterization within their scope of practice

Exclusion criteria

* no procedures of interest within scope of practice

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
intraosseous (IO) catheterization procedural outcome scoreparticipants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study periodThe IO assessment tool was adapted from a previously validated simulation assessment tool. The score ranged from 0-12, with higher score demonstrating better performance. Participants submitted videos for review, which were scored by trained video reviewers using the assessment tool based on a corresponding data dictionary. Scores were then aggregated for analysis.
bag valve mask (BVM) ventilation procedural outcome scoreparticipants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study periodThe BVM assessment tool was adapted from a previously validated simulation assessment tool. The score ranged from 0-12, with higher score demonstrating better performance. Participants submitted videos for review, which were scored by trained video reviewers using the assessment tool based on a corresponding data dictionary. Scores were then aggregated for analysis.
supraglottic device (SGD) placement procedural outcome scoreparticipants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study periodThe SGD assessment tool was modified from a prior psychomotor examination checklist used by the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians. The score ranged from 0-14, with higher score demonstrating better performance. Participants submitted videos for review, which were scored by trained video reviewers using the assessment tool based on a corresponding data dictionary. Scores were then aggregated for analysis.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
qualitative feedback regarding the curriculum1 year study periodFeedback regarding the curriculum and educational experience was solicited via e-mail from participants at time of score reporting. Similar feedback was solicited via e-mail from educators throughout the study period during scheduling or troubleshooting correspondences. Comments were tabulated and summarized.

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026