AzTrials
AzTrials

EducationNCT07307573

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

A study testing education in people with Education and Emergency Medical Services, run by Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial 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. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Education, Emergency Medical Services
What is being tested?
education
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
133 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
14 Jun 2021to 30 Jun 2022
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 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • 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

Who cannot join

  • no procedures of interest within scope of practice

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center

    Cincinnati, Ohio, 45229

Other trials in United States

About this study

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

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.

Read the 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.

Being tested
education

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • educationBehavioural

    pediatric emergency care coordinator provided education on each procedure performed

Study groups in NCT07307573
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
educational interventionExperimentalreceived training and submitted video on each procedure
Receives: Behavioral: education

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. intraosseous (IO) catheterization procedural outcome score

    The 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.

    Measured: participants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study period

  2. bag valve mask (BVM) ventilation procedural outcome score

    The 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.

    Measured: participants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study period

  3. supraglottic device (SGD) placement procedural outcome score

    The 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.

    Measured: participants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study period

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. qualitative feedback regarding the curriculum

    Feedback 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.

    Measured: 1 year study period

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted29 Dec 2025
  2. Study start14 Jun 2021
  3. Primary completion30 Jun 2022
  4. Study completion30 Jun 2022

Resources

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
Health services research
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Model description
all participants received the same educational intervention
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
133 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07307573
Sponsor's protocol ID
2021-0172
Other IDs
2UL1TR001425-05A1
Status last verified
Dec 2025
First submitted
23 Dec 2025
Last updated
29 Dec 2025
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Lee SH, Riney LC, Merkt B, McDonough SD, Baker J, Boyd S, Zhang Y, Geis GL. Improving Pediatric Procedural Skills for EMS Clinicians: A Longitudinal Simulation-Based Curriculum with Novel, Remote, First-Person-View Video-Based Outcome Measurement. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2024;28(2):352-362. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2023.2263555. Epub 2024 Feb 1.

    PubMed 37751212

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing education in people with Education and Emergency Medical Services, run by Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati at 1 site in United States.

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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Dec 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 United States. 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 is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

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?

intraosseous (IO) catheterization procedural outcome score (time frame: participants submitted 1-2 procedural videos based on training date during the 1-year study period). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT07307573, 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 29 Dec 2025.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in