Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2025
Author Spotlight: Evaluating Clinicians' Adoption of Ultrasound-Guided Vascular Cannulation Through Simulation Training
Published on: August 9, 2024
Simulation-Based Training Program for Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Placement: Randomized Comparative Study
Marcia A Corvetto1, Eduardo Kattan, Gaspar Ramírez
1From the División de Anestesiología (M.A.C., G.R., F.R.A.), Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Departamento de Medicina Intensiva (E.K.), Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Departamento de Traumatología (P.B.), Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; and Experimental Surgery and Simulation Center (M.A.C., E.A., E.Z., V.C.), Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Introduction:
Simulation training that includes deliberate practice is effective for procedural skill training. Delivering feedback remotely and asynchronously has been examined for more cost-efficient training. This prospective randomized study aimed to compare 2 feedback techniques for simulation training: synchronous direct feedback versus asynchronous distance feedback (ASYNC).
Methods:
Forty anesthesia and internal medicine residents were recruited after study approval by the institutional ethics committee. Residents reviewed instructional material on an online platform and performed a pretraining assessment (PRE) for peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) placement. Each resident was then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 training types, practice with synchronous direct feedback (SYNC) or practice with ASYNC. Training consisted of four, 1-hour practice sessions; each was conducted once per week. Both groups underwent posttraining evaluation (POST). The PRE and POST assessments were videotaped and evaluated by 2 independent, blinded reviewers using a global rating scale.
Results:
Thirty-five residents completed the training program and both evaluations. Both groups had significantly improved global rating scale scores after 4 sessions. The SYNC group improved from 28 to 45 points ( P < 0.01); the ASYNC group improved from 26.5 to 46 points ( P < 0.01). We found no significant between-group differences for the PRE ( P = 0.42) or POST assessments ( P = 0.13).
Conclusion:
This simulation-based training program significantly improved residents' peripherally inserted central venous catheter placement skills using either modality. With these results, we are unable to demonstrate the superiority of synchronous feedback over ASYNC. Asynchronous feedback training modality represents a new, innovative approach for health care procedural skills training.
