Can simulated emergencies train better CPR responders than lectures?
NCT ID NCT07803861
First seen Sep 04, 2026 · Last updated Sep 04, 2026
Summary
This study looks back at training records to compare two methods of teaching CPR to medical and nursing students: traditional lectures versus hands-on, case-based simulations where students practice as a team in realistic emergency scenarios. The researchers want to know if simulation helps students gain better skills and knowledge. The study includes 69 first-time interns who completed CPR training between September 2024 and November 2025. Since it uses existing anonymous records, no new activities or visits are required.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- case-based scenario simulation teaching
- What this could lead to
- If simulation training proves more effective, medical and nursing schools may adopt it to better prepare students for real cardiac arrest emergencies.
- What could go wrong
- This is a retrospective review of existing records, not a controlled experiment, so other factors could explain any differences. Also, results from one institution may not apply everywhere.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Participants
-
69 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Sep 2024
- Finished
-
Dec 2025
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
Who is studied
Enrolled 69 medical and nursing interns rotating at our hospital from September 2024 to November 2025.
- Ages
-
Children (under 18), adults (18 to 64) and older adults (65 and over)
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Not accepted
This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * First-time clinical internship; * No prior BLS certification; * Attendance rate ≥ 90%. Exclusion Criteria: * Leave of absence ≥10% during the training period; * Withdrawal from the study for other reasons after enrollment.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Cardiac and respiratory arrest are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine
Hangzhou, China