Trial reportSimulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare2015
Simulation Improves Procedural Protocol Adherence During Central Venous Catheter Placement: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of surgical simulation on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2021Pooled it
- Pragmatic trial evaluating the impact of simulation training on high-risk prescribing to older adults by junior physicians.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Trial
- Comparison of multimodal active learning and single-modality procedural simulation for central venous catheter insertion for incoming residents in anesthesiology: a prospective and randomized study.BMC medical education · 2022Trial
- Navigating ethical considerations and challenges in medical education research.Korean journal of medical education · 2026Article
- Assessing anatomical knowledge and confidence in central venous catheter insertion: a single-center cross-sectional study among physicians in a resource-limited setting.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Identifying diversity of patient anatomy through automated image analysis of clinical ultrasounds.Journal of ultrasound · 2024Article
- Preventing mechanical complications associated with central venous catheter placement.BJA education · 2023Review
- Prescribing decision making by medical residents on night shifts: A qualitative study.Medical education · 2022Article
- Overcoming Decisional Gaps in High-Risk Prescribing by Junior Physicians Using Simulation-Based Training: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Outcomes of Simulation-Based Education for Vascular Access: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2021Review
- Massive Hemorrhage Protocol Application and Teamwork Skills.AEM education and training · 2021Article
- Standardizing education in interventional pulmonology in the midst of technological change.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Practical guide for safe central venous catheterization and management 2017.Journal of anesthesia · 2020Review
- The effects of graduate competency-based education and mastery learning on patient care and return on investment: a narrative review of basic anesthetic procedures.BMC medical education · 2018Review
- Insertion rates and complications of central lines in the UK population: A pilot study.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2018Article
- Most medical practices are not parachutes: a citation analysis of practices felt by biomedical authors to be analogous to parachutes.CMAJ open · 2018Article
- Central venous catheterization training: current perspectives on the role of simulation.Advances in medical education and practice · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSimulation training may improve proficiency at and reduce complications from central venous catheter (CVC) placement, but the scope of simulation's effect remains unclear. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effects of a pragmatic CVC simulation program on procedural protocol adherence, technical skill, and patient outcomes.
methodsInternal medicine interns were randomized to standard training for CVC insertion or standard training plus simulation-based mastery training. Standard training involved a lecture, a video-based online module, and instruction by the supervising physician during actual CVC insertions. Intervention-group subjects additionally underwent supervised training on a venous access simulator until they demonstrated procedural competence. Raters evaluated interns' performance during internal jugular CVC placement on actual patients in the medical intensive care unit. Generalized estimating equations were used to account for outcome clustering within trainees.
resultsWe observed 52 interns placing 87 CVCs. Simulation-trained interns exhibited better adherence to prescribed procedural technique than interns who received only standard training (P = 0.024). There were no significant differences detected in first-attempt or overall cannulation success rates, mean needle passes, global assessment scores, or complication rates.
conclusionsSimulation training added to standard training improved protocol adherence during CVC insertion by novice practitioners. This study may have been too small to detect meaningful differences in venous cannulation proficiency and other clinical outcomes, highlighting the difficulty of patient-centered simulation research in settings where poor outcomes are rare. For high-performing systems, where protocol deviations may provide an important proxy for rare procedural complications, simulation may improve CVC insertion quality and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.