Trial reportBMC medical education2025
The impact of intraoperative non-technical skills training on scrub practitioners' self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundApproximately half of all adverse events occur in the operating room, highlighting the critical role of non-technical skills in operating rooms. Effective non-technical skills among operating room nurses can significantly reduce the occurrence of such events. Moreover, self-efficacy in non-technical skills may directly impact professional performance and patient safety. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the impact of intraoperative non-technical skills training on scrub practitioners' self-efficacy.
methodsIn a randomized controlled trial, 30 scrub practitioners were assigned to the intervention group and 30 to the control group through random allocation. The intervention group underwent training in non-technical skills using a combined technique of lectures and simulated video scenarios delivered in two two-hour training sessions. Meanwhile, the control group received no training. The data collection tool was a two-part questionnaire. The first part collected demographic data (age, gender, work experience, and educational level), while the second part assessed scrub practitioners' self-efficacy in intraoperative non-technical skills. The questionnaire was administered online in two phases, with a one-month interval between them, through the Telegram application to the participants in both groups. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, and paired t-tests.
resultsThe demographic variables of the intervention group did not show significant differences compared to the control group. The independent t-test revealed no significant difference in overall self-efficacy between the intervention and control groups before the training (P = 0.513). However, after the training, a statistically significant difference was observed (P = 0.025). There were no significant differences among the self-efficacy components between the intervention and control groups before the training (P > 0.05). However, after the training, self-efficacy in the two skills of situation awareness and communication and teamwork showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05).
conclusionNon-technical skills are crucial for scrub practitioners to perform their tasks safely and efficiently. Training can enhance the self-efficacy of scrub practitioners in their non-technical skills. Therefore, it is necessary to incorporate non-technical skills training into the educational curriculum and continuing education programs for scrub practitioners.
trial registrationThe IRCT code (IRCT20150715023216N15) was obtained from the Iranian Clinical Trials Registry website on 2023/08/05 before sampling.
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.