Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07790497

Video-Based Versus Bedside eFAST Training in Final-Year Medical Students

This study compared two methods of teaching the Extended Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (eFAST) examination to final-year medical students. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either a 60-minute standardized video-based training session or a 60-minute instructor-led bedside training session. Both groups received the same educational content, for the same duration, from the same instructor.

Within one hour after completing the training, each participant performed an individual eFAST examination on a healthy volunteer. Performance was assessed by an evaluator who was unaware of the participant's training group, using an eFAST Image Acquisition Checklist. The study compared overall immediate eFAST performance between the two teaching methods and also examined performance in individual eFAST examination windows.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Medical Education Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) eFast

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Istanbul Medeniyet University

Kadıköy, Istanbul, Turkey (Türkiye)

About this study

This was a single-center, parallel-group, individually randomized educational trial involving final-year medical students undertaking an emergency medicine clerkship. Participants with previous formal ultrasound training or prior practical ultrasound experience were excluded. One hundred consenting participants were randomized, with 50 assigned to standardized video-based eFAST training and 50 assigned to instructor-led bedside eFAST training.

Both interventions lasted 60 minutes and covered the same theoretical and practical eFAST content. Participants underwent an individual practical assessment on a healthy volunteer within one hour after training. Outcome assessors were blinded to training allocation. Performance was assessed using an eFAST Image Acquisition Checklist, which generated an overall score ranging from 0 to 100 and window-specific classifications of error-free performance.

No primary outcome was designated in advance of the analysis. For the present report and retrospective trial registration, the overall eFAST performance score is designated as the primary outcome, while the window-level comparisons are considered exploratory secondary outcomes.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Current enrollment as a final-year (sixth-year) medical student at İstanbul Medeniyet University Faculty of Medicine.

Participation in the emergency medicine clerkship during the study period. Provision of written informed consent before randomization.

Exclusion criteria

Previous formal ultrasound training. Prior practical ultrasound experience. A physical condition that could interfere with performing an ultrasound examination.

Declining or not providing written informed consent.

Treatment and study plan

Standardized Video-Based eFAST Training

Other

Participants watched a standardized 60-minute instructional video covering the theoretical principles and practical performance of eFAST. The video was recorded on a healthy volunteer and included demonstrations of the examination with visual annotation. Content included the principles and clinical indications of eFAST, ultrasound physics, examination windows, transducer selection, probe positioning and orientation, image optimization, normal anatomical landmarks, and representative pathological images.

Instructor-Led Bedside eFAST Training

Other

Participants received a 60-minute instructor-led bedside training session delivered by the same emergency physician on a healthy volunteer. The session covered the same theoretical and practical eFAST content as the video-based intervention and included live demonstration of each examination window followed by supervised practice, during which each participant performed the examination once under direct guidance.

Primary outcomes

  1. Overall eFAST Performance Score

    Time frame: Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

    Overall practical eFAST performance was assessed using the eFAST Image Acquisition and Interpretation Assessment Checklist. The checklist comprised 21 image-acquisition items across six eFAST windows and one image-differentiation component. Image-acquisition items contributed a maximum of 84 points and image differentiation contributed a maximum of 16 points, yielding a total score from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better performance. For this retrospective registration, the overall performance score is designated as the primary outcome; no primary outcome was prospectively designated before the analysis.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Error-Free Anterior Lung Window Performance

    Time frame: Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

    Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the anterior lung eFAST window correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.

  2. Error-Free Subxiphoid Window Performance

    Time frame: Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

    Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the subxiphoid eFAST window correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.

  3. Error-Free Right Upper Quadrant Window Performance

    Time frame: Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

    Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the right upper quadrant eFAST window.correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.

  4. Error-Free Left Upper Quadrant Window Performance

    Time frame: Within 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

    Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the left upper quadrant eFAST windowcorrectly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.

  5. Error-Free Pelvic Window Performance

    Time frame: ithin 1 hour after completion of the assigned training session

    Proportion of participants who completed all required steps for the pelvic eFAST window correctly. Any incorrectly performed required step resulted in classification as not error-free.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Gorkem Alper Solakoglu

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Comparative Effectiveness of Video-Based and Bedside Teaching for eFAST Training in Final-Year Medical Students: A Randomised Controlled Educational Trial

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2025
Study completion
2025
First posted
Aug 27, 2026
Registry last updated
Aug 27, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.