FeedbackNCT06449560
Applying Videos Feedback Learning to Improve Skills Performance of Physiotherapy Interns
A study testing Practice Group and Video Feedback Group in people with Feedback, run by Taipei Medical University WanFang Hospital.
Trial summary
This project uses self-practicing videos feedback to learn to improve the skill performance of physiotherapy interns. For traditional physiotherapy intern courses, teachers will conduct core courses and demonstrate teaching, but students are less familiar with the application of skills, even if adding practice course. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 65 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Feedback
- What is being tested?
- Practice Group and Video Feedback Group
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 90 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Jul 2024to 31 May 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 20 to 65 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- physical therapy interns require individuals to be over 20 years old.
Who cannot join
- Individuals unwilling to participate in the study.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Wang Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
This project uses self-practicing videos feedback to learn to improve the skill performance of physiotherapy interns. For traditional physiotherapy intern courses, teachers will conduct core courses and demonstrate teaching, but students are less familiar with the application of skills, even if adding practice course. The learning outcomes of the course are still not good in skill performance. By recording the self-practicing videos, the teacher uses observation and feedback to let the physiotherapy interns know whether the posture of the individual case, the fixed position of the limbs are appropriate, the resistance given and whether the verbal instruction is correct, and based on the evaluation outcomes to observe the students' learning status and clinical thinking ability can improve the skill performance and learning satisfaction.
Read the detailed description
Methods:
A parallel-group design. Ninety physiotherapy interns from a medical institution were enrolled as participants, with practice and videos feedback groups each comprising 45 participants. Two groups received traditional core course. The practice group received an additional 20 minutes of practice course. However, the videos feedback group received an additional 20 minutes of recording the self-practicing videos, the teacher uses observation and feedback learning of evaluation skills to improve the performance of physical therapy interns.The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills, Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise, Objective structured clinical examination, and satisfaction questionnaire were used in a pretest, posttest and the follow-up test.The inclusion criteria was being older than 20 years.Students were excluded if they could not complete the questionnaire.
- Conditions
- Feedback
- Being tested
- Practice Group, Video Feedback Group
- Keywords
- Videos Feedback, Skills Performance, Physiotherapy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Practice GroupOther
Participants in this group engage in the traditional core course (1-hour lecture on upper limb soft tissue differential diagnosis and assessment techniques. They have the opportunity to observe teacher demonstrations, and the course content and instructional demonstrations are consistent and delivered by the same therapist), followed by a 20-minute practical session where they pair up for mutual hands-on practice. The assessment of upper limb soft tissue operations takes approximately 4 minutes per session, allowing for approximately 5 practice sessions.
Video Feedback GroupOther
Participants receive the traditional core course (as the same in the practice group) along with a 20-minute video feedback session. Initially, a therapist records students' assessment techniques in action, capturing the dynamic process on video. The recorded video is then played on a screen for both the course teacher and students to watch together. Participants can annotate specific actions during the viewing, and the course teacher facilitates a reflective discussion where participants observe and identify any issues or correct actions as expected. The teacher provides feedback on areas of improvement in the action process for further practice. The self-viewing of the recorded video serves as a valuable tool for enhancing the skill performance of physical therapy interns.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Practice Group | Active comparator | Participants in this group engage in the traditional core course, followed by a 20-minute practical session where they pair up for mutual hands-on practice. The assessment of upper limb soft tissue operations takes approximately 4 minutes per session, allowing for approximately 5 practice sessions. Receives: Other: Practice Group |
| Video Feedback Group | Experimental | Participants receive the traditional core course along with a 20-minute video feedback session. Initially, a therapist records students' assessment techniques in action, capturing the dynamic process on video. The recorded video is then played on a screen for both the course teacher and students to watch together. Participants can annotate specific actions during the viewing, and the course teacher facilitates a reflective discussion where participants observe and identify any issues or correct actions as expected. The teacher provides feedback on areas of improvement in the action process for further practice. The self-viewing of the recorded video serves as a valuable tool for enhancing the skill performance of physical therapy interns. Receives: Other: Practice Group; Other: Video Feedback Group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)
Evaluators utilize a detailed, operationally defined standardized checklist to assess the performance of examinees in a structured clinical skills assessment. This instructional design aims to aid students in learning and understanding their learning outcomes, evaluating the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of the examinees through a performance-based testing approach.
The scoring sheet includes an standardized checklist and an overall performance assessment. The standardized checklist comprises 15 items, with results presented in percentages, where higher scores indicate better performance. The overall performance assessment ranges from 5 points (excellent) to 1 point (poor).
Measured: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up
Secondary outcomes (3)
Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX)
The Mini-CEX focuses on the performance of interactions with patients. Clinical instructors can use it to directly observe the interaction between learners and patients, conduct a simple assessment of the Mini-CEX, and provide direct feedback to the learners. Clinical instructors can assess a specific aspect (medical interview, physical examination, operational skills, counseling and health education, clinical judgment, organizational efficiency, humanitarian professionalism) each time.
The assessment consists of 7 items, with scores ranging from 1 to 9 points each. The total score ranges from 7 to 63 points, with higher scores indicating better performance.
Measured: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up
Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS)
Clinical instructors evaluate and provide feedback on the procedural skills of the examinee. Each clinical procedural skill is assessed and feedback is provided to ensure learning effectiveness.
The assessment consists of 10 items, with scores ranging from 1 to 6 points each. The total score ranges from 10 to 60 points, with higher scores indicating better performance.
Measured: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up
Course Satisfaction
Understand your satisfaction with various arrangements of this course activity, including speakers, lecture content, and related activities.
The assessment consists of 12 items, with scores ranging from 1 to 5 points each. The total score ranges from 12 to 60 points, with higher scores indicating higher satisfaction.
Measured: within 1 week post test
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted10 Jun 2024
- Study start1 Jul 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 May 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion31 May 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for FeedbackStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Model description
- Randomized, single-blinded, two parallel-groups trial
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 90 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Taipei Medical University WanFang Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, I Hsien Lin, Taipei Medical University WanFang Hospital
- Investigators
- Hsien I Lin, MS, Principal investigator, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06449560
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- N202211059
- Status last verified
- Jun 2024
- First submitted
- 10 Dec 2023
- Last updated
- 10 Jun 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, Clinical Study Report
Publications
Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med. 1990 Sep;65(9 Suppl):S63-7. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199009000-00045. No abstract available.
PubMed 2400509Mori B, Carnahan H, Herold J. Use of Simulation Learning Experiences in Physical Therapy Entry-to-Practice Curricula: A Systematic Review. Physiother Can. 2015 Spring;67(2):194-202. doi: 10.3138/ptc.2014-40E.
PubMed 25931672Blackstock FC, Watson KM, Morris NR, Jones A, Wright A, McMeeken JM, Rivett DA, O'Connor V, Peterson RF, Haines TP, Watson G, Jull GA. Simulation can contribute a part of cardiorespiratory physiotherapy clinical education: two randomized trials. Simul Healthc. 2013 Feb;8(1):32-42. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e318273101a.
PubMed 23250189Watson K, Wright A, Morris N, McMeeken J, Rivett D, Blackstock F, Jones A, Haines T, O'Connor V, Watson G, Peterson R, Jull G. Can simulation replace part of clinical time? Two parallel randomised controlled trials. Med Educ. 2012 Jul;46(7):657-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04295.x. Epub 2012 May 30.
PubMed 22646319Sanders BR, Ruvolo JF. Mock clinic. An approach to clinical education. Phys Ther. 1981 Aug;61(8):1163-7. doi: 10.1093/ptj/61.8.1163.
PubMed 7267707Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav. 2004 Jun;36(2):212-24. doi: 10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224.
PubMed 15130871Emmen HH, Wesseling LG, Bootsma RJ, Whiting HT, Van Wieringen PC. The effect of video-modelling and video-feedback on the learning of the tennis service by novices. J Sports Sci. 1985 Summer;3(2):127-38. doi: 10.1080/02640418508729742.
PubMed 4094023Wulf G, Shea C, Lewthwaite R. Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors. Med Educ. 2010 Jan;44(1):75-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03421.x.
PubMed 20078758Duffy A. A concept analysis of reflective practice: determining its value to nurses. Br J Nurs. 2007 Dec 13-2008 Jan 9;16(22):1400-7. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2007.16.22.27771.
PubMed 18361389Rotthoff T, Ostapczuk MS, Kroncke KD, Zimmerhofer A, Decking U, Schneider M, Ritz-Timme S. Criterion validity of a competency-based assessment center in medical education--a 4-year follow-up study. Med Educ Online. 2014 Sep 12;19:25254. doi: 10.3402/meo.v19.25254. eCollection 2014.
PubMed 25219931
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Jun 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Wang Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06449560
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- N202211059
- Conditions
- Feedback
- Keywords
- Videos Feedback, Skills Performance, Physiotherapy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 90 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Taipei Medical University WanFang HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jul 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 May 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 May 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 10 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.
This project uses self-practicing videos feedback to learn to improve the skill performance of physiotherapy interns. For traditional physiotherapy intern courses, teachers will conduct core courses and demonstrate teaching, but students are less familiar with the application of skills, even if adding practice course. The learning outcomes of the course are still not good in skill performance. By recording the self-practicing videos, the teacher uses observation and feedback to let the physiotherapy interns know whether the posture of the individual case, the fixed position of the limbs are appropriate, the resistance given and whether the verbal instruction is correct, and based on the evaluation outcomes to observe the students' learning status and clinical thinking ability can improve the skill performance and learning satisfaction.
Detailed description
Methods:
A parallel-group design. Ninety physiotherapy interns from a medical institution were enrolled as participants, with practice and videos feedback groups each comprising 45 participants. Two groups received traditional core course. The practice group received an additional 20 minutes of practice course. However, the videos feedback group received an additional 20 minutes of recording the self-practicing videos, the teacher uses observation and feedback learning of evaluation skills to improve the performance of physical therapy interns.The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills, Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise, Objective structured clinical examination, and satisfaction questionnaire were used in a pretest, posttest and the follow-up test.The inclusion criteria was being older than 20 years.Students were excluded if they could not complete the questionnaire.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized, single-blinded, two parallel-groups trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Practice Group | Active comparator | Other: Practice GroupParticipants in this group engage in the traditional core course, followed by a 20-minute practical session where they pair up for mutual hands-on practice. The assessment of upper limb soft tissue operations takes approximately 4 minutes per session, allowing for approximately 5 practice sessions. |
| Video Feedback Group | Experimental | Other: Practice Group, Other: Video Feedback GroupParticipants receive the traditional core course along with a 20-minute video feedback session. Initially, a therapist records students' assessment techniques in action, capturing the dynamic process on video. The recorded video is then played on a screen for both the course teacher and students to watch together. Participants can annotate specific actions during the viewing, and the course teacher facilitates a reflective discussion where participants observe and identify any issues or correct actions as expected. The teacher provides feedback on areas of improvement in the action process for further practice. The self-viewing of the recorded video serves as a valuable tool for enhancing the skill performance of physical therapy interns. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- physical therapy interns require individuals to be over 20 years old.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Individuals unwilling to participate in the study.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Practice GroupParticipants in this group engage in the traditional core course (1-hour lecture on upper limb soft tissue differential diagnosis and assessment techniques. They have the opportunity to observe teacher demonstrations, and the course content and instructional demonstrations are consistent and delivered by the same therapist), followed by a 20-minute practical session where they pair up for mutual hands-on practice. The assessment of upper limb soft tissue operations takes approximately 4 minutes per session, allowing for approximately 5 practice sessions. | Other | Practice Group, Video Feedback Group |
| Video Feedback GroupParticipants receive the traditional core course (as the same in the practice group) along with a 20-minute video feedback session. Initially, a therapist records students' assessment techniques in action, capturing the dynamic process on video. The recorded video is then played on a screen for both the course teacher and students to watch together. Participants can annotate specific actions during the viewing, and the course teacher facilitates a reflective discussion where participants observe and identify any issues or correct actions as expected. The teacher provides feedback on areas of improvement in the action process for further practice. The self-viewing of the recorded video serves as a valuable tool for enhancing the skill performance of physical therapy interns. | Other | Video Feedback Group |
Primary outcome
Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)
Time frame: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up
Evaluators utilize a detailed, operationally defined standardized checklist to assess the performance of examinees in a structured clinical skills assessment. This instructional design aims to aid students in learning and understanding their learning outcomes, evaluating the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of the examinees through a performance-based testing approach. The scoring sheet includes an standardized checklist and an overall performance assessment. The standardized checklist comprises 15 items, with results presented in percentages, where higher scores indicate better performance. The overall performance assessment ranges from 5 points (excellent) to 1 point (poor).
3 secondary outcomes
Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX)
Time frame: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up
Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS)
Time frame: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up
Course Satisfaction
Time frame: within 1 week post test
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Jun 2024.
- Background: PubMed 2400509Miller GE. The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med. 1990 Sep;65(9 Suppl):S63-7. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199009000-00045. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 25931672Mori B, Carnahan H, Herold J. Use of Simulation Learning Experiences in Physical Therapy Entry-to-Practice Curricula: A Systematic Review. Physiother Can. 2015 Spring;67(2):194-202. doi: 10.3138/ptc.2014-40E.
- Background: PubMed 23250189Blackstock FC, Watson KM, Morris NR, Jones A, Wright A, McMeeken JM, Rivett DA, O'Connor V, Peterson RF, Haines TP, Watson G, Jull GA. Simulation can contribute a part of cardiorespiratory physiotherapy clinical education: two randomized trials. Simul Healthc. 2013 Feb;8(1):32-42. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e318273101a.
- Background: PubMed 22646319Watson K, Wright A, Morris N, McMeeken J, Rivett D, Blackstock F, Jones A, Haines T, O'Connor V, Watson G, Peterson R, Jull G. Can simulation replace part of clinical time? Two parallel randomised controlled trials. Med Educ. 2012 Jul;46(7):657-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04295.x. Epub 2012 May 30.
- Background: PubMed 7267707Sanders BR, Ruvolo JF. Mock clinic. An approach to clinical education. Phys Ther. 1981 Aug;61(8):1163-7. doi: 10.1093/ptj/61.8.1163.
- Background: PubMed 15130871Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav. 2004 Jun;36(2):212-24. doi: 10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224.
- Background: PubMed 4094023Emmen HH, Wesseling LG, Bootsma RJ, Whiting HT, Van Wieringen PC. The effect of video-modelling and video-feedback on the learning of the tennis service by novices. J Sports Sci. 1985 Summer;3(2):127-38. doi: 10.1080/02640418508729742.
- Background: PubMed 20078758Wulf G, Shea C, Lewthwaite R. Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors. Med Educ. 2010 Jan;44(1):75-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03421.x.
- Background: PubMed 18361389Duffy A. A concept analysis of reflective practice: determining its value to nurses. Br J Nurs. 2007 Dec 13-2008 Jan 9;16(22):1400-7. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2007.16.22.27771.
- Background: PubMed 25219931Rotthoff T, Ostapczuk MS, Kroncke KD, Zimmerhofer A, Decking U, Schneider M, Ritz-Timme S. Criterion validity of a competency-based assessment center in medical education--a 4-year follow-up study. Med Educ Online. 2014 Sep 12;19:25254. doi: 10.3402/meo.v19.25254. eCollection 2014.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, Clinical Study Report
Related trials for Feedback
Not yet recruiting
AI Smart Glasses Feedback for Intubation Training in Medical Students
Intubation, Intratracheal, Medical Education
Not yet recruiting
Video-based Visual Feedback Combined With Task-oriented Physiotherapy Among Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral Palsy (CP)
Recruiting
Nightly Wearable Monitoring During Home-Based Submental Electrical Stimulation for Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Enrolling by invitation
Accelerating Maternal and Newborn Survival: The AMANI Study
Maternal and Perinatal Death Surveillance and Response (MPDSR) Implementation, Maternal Mortality
RecruitingObservational study
Evaluation of Catching Skills in Preschoolers With Motor Difficulties
Development Coordination Disorder, Motor Disabilities
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.
Hsien I Lin, MS principal investigator
Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Practice Group and Video Feedback Group in people with Feedback, run by Taipei Medical University WanFang Hospital.
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 1 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Jun 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Hsien I Lin, MS (+886-2-29307930 ext. 1600, 88262@w.tmu.edu.tw), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) (time frame: pre-test, within 1 week post test, 3-month follow-up). 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 NCT06449560, which also lists 10 linked publications.
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 10 Jun 2024.