Virtual RealityTrauma SimVRNCT06445764
Traumatic Cardiac Arrest and Trauma SimVR Training
A study testing e-learning and Virtual reality training in people with Virtual Reality and Heart Arrest, run by Medical University of Vienna at 1 site in Austria.
Trial summary
The goal of this single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of using virtual reality technology to provide learners with skills and knowledge in the management of traumatic cardiac arrest in first-year residents at the emergency department. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 110 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Virtual Reality, Heart Arrest
- What is being tested?
- e-learning and Virtual reality training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustria
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2025to 31 Dec 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 110 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- first-year residents at the emergency department
- only people who do not need eyeglasses for using VR
Who cannot join
- pre-disposition for cybersickness (motion sickness, pregnancy, pre-existing cybersickness)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Enhancing Trauma Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Simulation Training With the Use of Virtual Reality (Trauma SimVR): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
The goal of this single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of using virtual reality technology to provide learners with skills and knowledge in the management of traumatic cardiac arrest in first-year residents at the emergency department.
The main question it aims to answer is:
Does the use of virtual reality in the context of trauma cardiopulmonary resuscitation training result in shorter times to order/perform pre-defined critical actions?
Participants will learn management skills for in-hospital traumatic cardiac arrest using either newly developed virtual reality software or e-learning focused on the same content.
- Conditions
- Virtual Reality, Heart Arrest
- Being tested
- e-learning, Virtual reality training
- Keywords
- in-hospital cardiac arrest, Education, Medical
- Medical subject headings
- Heart Arrest
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
e-learningOther
Participants will complete an e-learning course over a two-week period that focuses on skills and knowledge related to the management of in-hospital cardiac arrest. This course prepares participants for an in-person assessment.
Virtual reality trainingOther
Participants will complete a virtual reality training over a two-week period that focuses on skills and knowledge related to the management of in-hospital cardiac arrest. This training prepares participants for an in-person assessment.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| e-learning | Other | Not described Receives: Other: e-learning |
| Virtual reality training | Other | Not described Receives: Other: Virtual reality training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time to critical action
Expert-based assessment of the difference in time (seconds) to the predefined primary critical action between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Secondary outcomes (25)
Time to secondary critical action #1
Expert-based assessment of the difference in time (seconds) to the predefined secondary critical action #1 between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Time to secondary critical action #2
Expert-based assessment of the difference in time (seconds) to the predefined secondary critical action #2 between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Number of unrecognized causes of traumatic cardiac arrest
Expert-based assessment of the difference in unrecognized underlying causes of traumatic cardiac arrest between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Number of patients declared dead prematurely
Expert-based assessment of the difference in the number of patients declared dead prematurely between the randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Number of protocol deviations
Expert-based assessment of the difference in the frequency of protocol deviations between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation. Protocol deviations are listed in the study protocol and reflect the recommendations of the guidelines on which the study is based.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gender-differences in learning outcomes
Expert-based assessment of the difference in time (seconds) to the predefined primary critical action between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation based on gender.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Group difference in global cognitive load while performing the in-person assessment simulation
Assessment of the difference in global cognitive load between randomized groups immediately following the in-person assessment simulation using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) global task load index, which ranges from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate greater cognitive load.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Group difference in cognitive load (per objective) while performing the in-person assessment simulation
Assessment of the difference in cognitive load (per objective) between randomized groups immediately following the in-person assessment simulation using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) task load index, which ranges from 0 to 100.
Objectives are: (mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, performance, effort, frustration). Higher scores indicate greater mental demand/higher physical demand/ higher temporal demand/worse performance/more effort/more frustration).
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: dwell-time in areas of interest
Assessment of differences (in seconds) in gaze behavior (dwell time in areas of interest) using Tobii Pro eye-tracking technology between randomized groups based on recordings of the in-person assessment simulation
The defined areas of interest for analysis are the manikin's head/airway, the manikin's thorax, the vital signs monitor, and the ventilator monitor.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: fixation count in areas of interest
Assessment of differences in gaze behavior (fixation count in areas of interest) using Tobii Pro eye-tracking technology between randomized groups based on recordings of the in-person assessment simulation.
The defined areas of interest for analysis are the manikin's head/airway, the manikin's thorax, the vital signs monitor, and the ventilator monitor.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: average fixation duration in areas of interest
Assessment of differences (in seconds) in gaze behavior (average fixation duration in areas of interest) using Tobii Pro eye-tracking technology between randomized groups based on recordings of the in-person assessment simulation
The defined areas of interest for analysis are the manikin's head/airway, the manikin's thorax, the vital signs monitor, and the ventilator monitor.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: time when no area of interest is illustrated
Assessment of differences (in seconds) in gaze behavior (time when no area of interest is illustrated) using Tobii Pro eye-tracking technology between randomized groups based on recordings of the in-person assessment simulation
The defined areas of interst for analysis are the manikin's head/airway, the manikin's thorax, the vital signs monitor, and the ventilator monitor.
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective impressions of their learning progress when using virtual reality/e-learning
5-point Likert scale
1 - not helpful at all; 2 - rather not helpful; 3 - neither helpful nor not helpful; 4 - rather helpful; 5 - very helpful
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective impressions of their level of frustration when using virtual reality/e-learning
5-point Likert scale
1 - not frustrated at all; 2 - rather not frustrated; 3 - neither frustrated nor not frustrated; 4 - rather frustrated; 5 - very frustrated
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective impression of their level of enjoyment when using virtual reality/e-learning
5-point Likert scale
1 - not enjoyed at all; 2 - rather not enjoyed; 3 - neither enjoyed nor not enjoyed; 4 - rather enjoyed; 5 - very enjoyed
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective confidence in recognizing and providing initial care to polytraumatized patients in cardiac arrest in the in-person assessment simulation
5-point Likert scale
1 - not confident at all; 2 - rather not confident; 3 - neither confident nor not confident; 4 - rather confident; 5 - very confident
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective overall performance in the simulation sessions
5-point Likert scale
1 - not good at all; 2 - rather not good; 3 - neither good nor not good; 4 - rather good; 5 - very good
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' overall performance in the simulation sessions from the expert's point of view
5-point Likert scale
1 - not good at all; 2 - rather not good; 3 - neither good nor not good; 4 - rather good; 5 - very good
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played virtual reality video games in the past 12 months and the primary outcome
Spearman correlation
Frequency of playing within the past 12 months: never; less than once a week; once per week; more than once per week; daily
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played virtual reality video games between the ages of 6 and 18 and the primary outcome
Spearman correlation
Frequency of playing at the age of 6 to 18: never; less than once a week; once per week; more than once per week; daily
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played non-virtual-reality video games in the past 12 months and the primary outcome
Spearman correlation
Frequency of playing within the past 12 months: never; less than once a week; once per week; more than once per week; daily
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played non-virtual-reality video games between the ages of 6 and 18 and the primary outcome
Spearman correlation
Frequency of playing at the age of 6 to 18: never; less than once a week; once per week; more than once per week; daily
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Incidence rate of virtual reality related adverse events
Incidence of nausea, vomiting, dizziness, headache, overexertion/fatigue of the eyes (discomfort, blurred vision), stumbling, falling, bumping into real world objects while using virtual reality
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
System usability score for use of VR simulations
System Usability Scale score from 1 to 100 points
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Adjective Rating Scale for the use of the virtual reality simulations
7-point Likert scale
1 - the worst thing you can imagine; 2 - terrible; 3 - poor; 4 - okay; 5 - good; 6 - excellent; 7 - the best thing you can imagine
Measured: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Jun 2024
- Study start1 Sep 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
Why it stopped: Technical problems with VR scenario development
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Virtual RealityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Medical University of ViennaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of Vienna
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Josef Michael Lintschinger, Medical University of Vienna
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06445764
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1388/2023
- Acronym
- Trauma SimVR
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 26 May 2024
- Last updated
- 26 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Lintschinger JM, Metelka P, Kapral L, Kahlfuss F, Reischmann L, Kaider A, Holaubek C, Kaiser G, Wagner M, Ettl F, Sixt L, Schaden E, Hafner C. Enhancing trauma cardiopulmonary resuscitation simulation training with the use of virtual reality (Trauma SimVR): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2025 Jan 24;20(1):e0316828. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316828. eCollection 2025.
PubMed 39854477
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Enhancing Trauma Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Simulation Training With the Use of Virtual Reality (Trauma SimVR): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06445764
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Trauma SimVR / 1388/2023
- Conditions
- Virtual Reality, Heart Arrest
- Keywords
- in-hospital cardiac arrest, Education, Medical
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: Technical problems with VR scenario development
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medical University of ViennaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Jun 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of using virtual reality technology to provide learners with skills and knowledge in the management of traumatic cardiac arrest in first-year residents at the emergency department.
The main question it aims to answer is:
Does the use of virtual reality in the context of trauma cardiopulmonary resuscitation training result in shorter times to order/perform pre-defined critical actions?
Participants will learn management skills for in-hospital traumatic cardiac arrest using either newly developed virtual reality software or e-learning focused on the same content.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| e-learning | Other | Other: e-learning |
| Virtual reality training | Other | Other: Virtual reality training |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 110 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- first-year residents at the emergency department
- only people who do not need eyeglasses for using VR
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- pre-disposition for cybersickness (motion sickness, pregnancy, pre-existing cybersickness)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| e-learningParticipants will complete an e-learning course over a two-week period that focuses on skills and knowledge related to the management of in-hospital cardiac arrest. This course prepares participants for an in-person assessment. | Other | e-learning |
| Virtual reality trainingParticipants will complete a virtual reality training over a two-week period that focuses on skills and knowledge related to the management of in-hospital cardiac arrest. This training prepares participants for an in-person assessment. | Other | Virtual reality training |
Primary outcome
Time to critical action
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Expert-based assessment of the difference in time (seconds) to the predefined primary critical action between randomized groups in video recordings of an in-person assessment simulation.
25 secondary outcomes
Time to secondary critical action #1
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Time to secondary critical action #2
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Number of unrecognized causes of traumatic cardiac arrest
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Number of patients declared dead prematurely
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Number of protocol deviations
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gender-differences in learning outcomes
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Group difference in global cognitive load while performing the in-person assessment simulation
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Group difference in cognitive load (per objective) while performing the in-person assessment simulation
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: dwell-time in areas of interest
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: fixation count in areas of interest
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: average fixation duration in areas of interest
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Gaze behavior during the in-person assessment simulation: time when no area of interest is illustrated
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective impressions of their learning progress when using virtual reality/e-learning
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective impressions of their level of frustration when using virtual reality/e-learning
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective impression of their level of enjoyment when using virtual reality/e-learning
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective confidence in recognizing and providing initial care to polytraumatized patients in cardiac arrest in the in-person assessment simulation
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' subjective overall performance in the simulation sessions
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Participants' overall performance in the simulation sessions from the expert's point of view
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played virtual reality video games in the past 12 months and the primary outcome
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played virtual reality video games between the ages of 6 and 18 and the primary outcome
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played non-virtual-reality video games in the past 12 months and the primary outcome
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
The correlation between how often participants have played non-virtual-reality video games between the ages of 6 and 18 and the primary outcome
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Incidence rate of virtual reality related adverse events
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
System usability score for use of VR simulations
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Adjective Rating Scale for the use of the virtual reality simulations
Time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Sep 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39854477Lintschinger JM, Metelka P, Kapral L, Kahlfuss F, Reischmann L, Kaider A, Holaubek C, Kaiser G, Wagner M, Ettl F, Sixt L, Schaden E, Hafner C. Enhancing trauma cardiopulmonary resuscitation simulation training with the use of virtual reality (Trauma SimVR): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2025 Jan 24;20(1):e0316828. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316828. eCollection 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Virtual Reality
Not yet recruiting
Virtual Reality to Advance Dementia Care and Quality of Life
Dementia, Agitation
Not yet recruiting
Testing the Timing and Application of Virtual Reality Distraction During Knee Injections in a VA Pain Clinic
Pain Management, Injection Pain Prevention
Recruiting
Virtual Reality Intervention to Improve Psychological Symptom Burden for Cancer Patients Undergoing Treatment
Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder
Not yet recruiting
Evidence-based, Customized, Motion-recognition Rehabilitation System Development for Bed-ridden Patients - Validation of Effectiveness: Rehabit: Swim
ICU-acquired Weakness
RecruitingPhase 1
Rehabilitation Through Virtual Immersion & Integrated Exposure for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (ReVIVE for mTBI)
Traumatic Brain Injuries, TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing e-learning and Virtual reality training in people with Virtual Reality and Heart Arrest, run by Medical University of Vienna at 1 site in Austria.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Austria. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time to critical action (time frame: evaluation within 4 weeks after study completion). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06445764, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Sep 2025.