Does an instructional video as a stand-alone tool promote the acquisition of practical clinical skills? A randomised simulation research trial of skills acquisition and short-term retention.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of instructional videos as a stand-alone tool for the acquisition of practical skills is yet unknown because instructional videos are usually didactically embedded. Therefore, we evaluated the acquisition of the skill of a humeral intraosseous access via video in comparison to that of a self-study with an additional retention test. METHODS: After ethical approval, we conducted two consecutive studies. Both were designed as randomised controlled two-armed trials with last-year medical students as independent samples at our institutional simulation centre of a tertiary university hospital centre. In Study 1, we randomly assigned 78 participants to two groups: Vid-Self participants watched an instructional video as an intervention, followed by a test, and after seven days did a self-study as a control, followed by a test. Self-Vid ran through the trial in reverse order. In Study 2, we investigated the influence of the sequence of the two teaching methods on learning success in a new sample of 60 participants: Vid-Self watched an instructional video and directly afterward did the self-study followed by a test, whereas Self-Vid ran through that trial in reverse order. In Studies 1 and 2, the primary outcome was the score (worst score = 0, best score = 20) of the test after intervention and control. The secondary outcome in Study 1 was the change in score after seven days. RESULTS: Study 1: The Vid-Self (Participants n = 42) was superior to the Self-Vid (n = 36) (mean score 14.8 vs. 7.7, p < 0.001). After seven days, Self-vid outperformed Vid-Self (mean score 15.9 vs. 12.5, p < 0.001). Study 2: The Vid-Self (n = 30) and Self-Vid (n = 30) scores did not significantly differ (mean 16.5 vs. mean 16.5, p = 0.97). CONCLUSION: An instructional video as a stand-alone tool effectively promotes the acquisition of practical skills. The best results are yielded by a combination of an instructional video and self-study right after each other, irrespective of sequence. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05066204 (13/04/2021) (Study 1) and NCT04842357 (04/10/2021) (Study 2).

Exchange of a Tracheal Tube and Supraglottic Airway Device: Evaluation of Different Techniques in Three Simulated Airway Scenarios (TUBE Study)-A Prospective, Randomised Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: The swapping of a supraglottic airway device or a tracheal tube in anaesthetised adult patients is a challenging procedure because potential complications through hypoxemia and loss of airway may occur, with life-threatening implications. This study aims to evaluate which airway technique offers the highest success rate concerning a secure airway in established supraglottic airway and tracheal tube airway exchange scenarios. METHODS: After ethical approval, anaesthesiologists were randomised 1:1 into simulated scenarios: an LTS group (malpositioned laryngeal tube) and a Cuff group (relevant cuff leakage of a placed tracheal tube). After that, both groups completed a common scenario consisting of a partially obstructed tracheal tube lumen in a fixed prone position with a Mayfield clamp. The primary endpoint was a successful tracheal airway exchange within ten minutes after the start of the scenario and before severe hypoxemia (SpO2 < 80%) arose. Secondary endpoints were the evaluation of factors influencing success after 10 min. RESULTS: In total, 60 anaesthesiologists (LTS group n = 30; Cuff group n = 30) with a median experience of 7 years (IQR 4-11) were observed. Within 10 min, a malpositioned laryngeal tube was successfully exchanged by 27/30 (90%) participants, compared to the exchange of a tracheal tube with a relevant cuff leakage by 29/30 (97%; p > 0.05). An airway exchange in an obstructed tube scenario occurred in 22/59 (37%). Loss of airway maintenance showed an obvious association with failure in the common scenario (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The results of this simulation-based study reflect that the exchange of an existing but insufficient airway device in clinical practice is a high-risk procedure. Especially in a fixed prone position, the deliberate evaluation of the existing airway patency and well-conceived airway management in the case of the accidental loss of the airway or obstructed airway access are crucial.