Trial reportBritish journal of anaesthesia2025
Self-directed learning versus traditional instructor-led learning for education on a new anaesthesia workstation: a noninferiority, randomised, controlled trial.
Trial report in British journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05530382 (Comparing Self-guided Learning), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Comparing Self-guided Learning (Video and hands-on Simulation) With Traditional Instructor-led Learning for Medical Device Training: a Randomized-controlled Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Overview of Quantitative Research.Family medicine · 2026Review
- The evolving landscape of airway education in anesthesia for head and neck surgery.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2025Review
- Technology, evidence, and continuing clinical education: a role for self-directed learning?British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is fundamental for patient safety that medical devices are correctly and competently applied. Shift work, especially in anaesthesia, poses challenges to provide timely comprehensive learning opportunities. Because personnel shortages encourage cuts to staff education, self-directed learning might alleviate these difficulties.
methodsWe conducted a single-centre, noninferiority, randomised, controlled trial in a large university-based anaesthesia department. Anaesthesia nurses and physicians were randomly assigned 1:1 to self-directed learning including a learning video (intervention) or to an instructor-led workshop (control). Both groups attended a 1-h teaching session on a new anaesthesia workstation. Around 3 months later, participants from both groups were assessed on 12 competences at an examination station. The defined primary outcome was the difference in success rates between groups. We hypothesised that the success rate of self-directed learning would be noninferior to instructor-led learning by a noninferiority margin of Δ=10%.
resultsData from 222 participants (97 anaesthesia nurses, 125 physicians) were analysed. Participants were aged between 32 and 44 yr; 35.6% had <5 yr of professional experience. The success rate difference between both groups was -0.9% (90% confidence interval: -3.8%-1.7%), confirming the noninferiority of self-directed learning. DISCUSSION: Creating an educational video for the self-directed acquisition of necessary knowledge and skills to handle an anaesthesia workstation requires initial investment, but reduces substantially instructor time, as learners can study independently according to their needs. Video-supported self-directed learning of the handling of an anaesthesia workstation was not inferior to traditional teacher-led instruction. CLINICAL
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov(NCT05530382).
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.