CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04494633Updated Dec 15, 2023Results posted

Summative Assessment of the BurntOut 3D Simulation With Medical Students

An interventional study of Clinical Encounters Medical School 3D Simulation in Burnout, Student, Alcohol; Harmful Use and Quality of Life, sponsored by Clinical Tools, Inc.. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-12-15.

Sponsored by Clinical Tools, Inc. · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
73
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Burnout is a common problem for medical students and is associated with stress-related health problems and also potentially affects the quality of care delivered to their patients. Among the health problems commonly associated with burnout are substance use problems, and alcohol is the substance most often misused. The purpose of the evaluation is to document whether an educational intervention incorporating aspects of virtual reality (VR) via a 3D online simulation experience prevents or improves the primary endpoint of burnout and the secondary endpoints of burnout-related factors in medical students. The investigators will also will evaluate student satisfaction with the intervention to determine if it meets our standard of success. The hypothesis is that the intervention will improve the primary clinical endpoint of burnout from pre-intervention to post-intervention as measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory, a validated inventory that is widely used to measure burnout. The related factors that will be measured as secondary clinical endpoints include quality of life, substance use (alcohol and drugs), depression, and resilience. Due to evidence that these endpoints are linked to burnout, the investigators also hypothesize that the measures will improve pre- to post-intervention. Satisfaction of the target audience after completing the simulation intervention will also be evaluated. The evaluation will be prior to and after use of the simulation by medical student participants, using a pre-/post intervention, wait-list control, parallel design.

Read the detailed description

The investigators used a pre-/post-intervention design with wait-list controls who were able to use the intervention after the study, if they chose. The investigators recruited and enrolled 73 medical students. The number of participants selected is based on a power analysis of the design and experience of low dropout rate with this target audience; to reach a medium effect size the investigators plan for a final sample size of 68 medical students and 63 actually completed the study. During the intervention phase of the study, intervention group students 1) Completed the simulation experience: an interactive online simulation, interactive online case stories, and resilience-building activities (taking around 2 hours over a period of less than 2 weeks); and 2) Completed pre- assessments and 2-4 week post-assessments (each taking \<1 hour). Controls completing pre-assessments and repeated the pre assessments after a 2 to 4 week wait period. The investigators screened for and excluded students with severe depression and suicidality but none needed to be excluded for this reason. The primary clinical endpoint was burnout as measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Secondary endpoints were measured via adaptations of the following assessments: Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C/AUDIT) for alcohol use disorder, Patient Health Questionaire (PHQ2/PHQ9) to screen for depression, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale © (CD-RISC 2) for resiliency, two drug question screening for drug use, and Medical Student Quality of Life (MSQoL9). Control participants were invited to engage in the intervention after completing the study, that is, after completing their 2nd set of assessments. There were no adverse events.

02

Conditions studied

  • Burnout, Student
  • Alcohol; Harmful Use
  • Quality of Life
  • Depression
  • Resilience
  • Drug Use
  • Burnout, Professional
03

In context

Burnout, Professional

214 studies on the registry are indexed under Burnout, Professional; 33 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 73 is close to the median of 80 across 158 interventional studies indexed under Burnout, Professional.

Browse Burnout, Professional studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Clinical Tools, Inc. as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • US Medical students in years 2-4
  • Has access to a computer with Internet access

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

--Self report of active symptoms of major depression

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
73 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intervention

    Participants completed the pre-assessments, used the intervention, waited 2-4 weeks, and then completed the assessments again.

    Other: Clinical Encounters Medical School 3D Simulation

  • No intervention
    Wait Group

    Participants completed the pre-assessments, waited 2-4 weeks, and completed the assessments again.

Interventions

  • OtherClinical Encounters Medical School 3D Simulation

    A 3D simulation related to coping with the stresses of medical school and burnout.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Burnout Change

    Burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (modified). This scale uses items to assess emotional exhaustion, and depersonalization, and measure the sense of personal accomplishment. Selected items were used to make it relevant to medical students experience. It was modified so that for all questions, higher scores indicate higher, and thus more problematic, levels of burnout. A decrease means an improvement; lower values mean more improvement. A positive change means worsening; higher values mean more worsening. Range: Minimum total value 0, Maximum total value 96. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Burnout Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Burnout Change is calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control) . See Baseline for more details.

    Time frame: 1 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Alcohol Use Change

    Alcohol use was measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Concise, (AUDIT-C). This instrument is a screening tool to identify users who are hazardous drinkers or who have active alcohol use disorder. Higher scores= greater frequency or amount of alcohol use or misuse Range: Minimum value: 0, Maximum value 12. High scores indicate worse outcomes. A score of over 4 for men, and over 3 for women is considered a positive screen for alcohol misuse. Higher scores suggest a higher likelihood that alcohol use is negatively impacting the person's health and safety. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Alcohol Use Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Alcohol Use Change was calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control) .

    Time frame: 1 months

  2. Depression Change

    Depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionaire, PHQ-9 (modified to 6 questions). The PHQ is a screen where respondents indicate how often the respondent has experienced depressed mood and anhedonia over the prior two weeks. Selected questions (6) were used. Range: Minimum score: 0, Maximum score18. High scores indicate worse outcomes. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Depression Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Depression Change is calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control). See Baseline for more details

    Time frame: 1 months

  3. Resilience Change

    Resilience was measured via the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale - modified to use 2 questions from the scale. Range: Minimum score: 0, Maximum score: 8. An increase means an improvement and higher scores mean better outcomes. A decrease means worsening; and lower values mean worse outcomes. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Resilience Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Resilience Change was calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control). See Baseline for more details.

    Time frame: 1 months

  4. Drug Use Change

    Drug use in the recent past was measured via the National Institute for Drug Abuse-Modified Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (modified to use 2 questions from this scale). Range: Minimum 0, Maximum score 10. High scores indicate more drug use and an increase means worse outcomes. Low scores mean less drug use and a decrease means better outcomes. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Drug Use Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Drug Use Change is calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control). See Baseline for more details.

    Time frame: 1 months

  5. Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life)

    Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life) were measured using the Medical Student Quality of Life Questionnaire with Nine Items (MSQoL9). The MSQoL is a linear self-assessment analog scale. It was modified to use only 5 of the questions from the scale that are on the domains of exhaustion and general happiness. Range for total score on the 5 questions: 1-25 Greater increase in scores means improvement; High scores indicate better outcomes. The analysis was modified so that high scores indicate a better quality of life for all questions. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life) Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life) Change was calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control).

    Time frame: 2 weeks- 1 month

07

Results

Posted Dec 15, 2023
Limitations and caveats
The study period was brief, to stay within the timeframe of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase II grant. Additional follow-up time and intervention use would be needed to fully assess the impact of the intervention.

Participant flow

Recruitment was from lists of medical student emails at multiple US medical schools. Recruitment and the study started on the same date and continued until sufficient students had started plus allowance for expected dropout rate.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneWait GroupIntervention
Started3538
Completed2934
Not completed64
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up53
Withdrew: Protocol violation11

Outcome measures

PrimaryBurnout Change

Burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory (modified). This scale uses items to assess emotional exhaustion, and depersonalization, and measure the sense of personal accomplishment. Selected items were used to make it relevant to medical students experience. It was modified so that for all questions, higher scores indicate higher, and thus more problematic, levels of burnout. A decrease means an improvement; lower values mean more improvement. A positive change means worsening; higher values mean more worsening. Range: Minimum total value 0, Maximum total value 96. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Burnout Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Burnout Change is calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control) . See Baseline for more details.

Time frame:
1 months
Reported as:
Mean · change in score on a scale
Burnout Change
change in score on a scaleWait GroupIntervention
Burnout Change0.06 ± 0.240.05 ± 0.51
Statistical analysis
  • Wait Group vs Intervention · t-test, 2 sided · p = 0.482314The change for each group was analyzed using a 2-tailed, unpaired, independent means, t-test with 61 degrees of freedom.
SecondaryAlcohol Use Change

Alcohol use was measured using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Concise, (AUDIT-C). This instrument is a screening tool to identify users who are hazardous drinkers or who have active alcohol use disorder. Higher scores= greater frequency or amount of alcohol use or misuse Range: Minimum value: 0, Maximum value 12. High scores indicate worse outcomes. A score of over 4 for men, and over 3 for women is considered a positive screen for alcohol misuse. Higher scores suggest a higher likelihood that alcohol use is negatively impacting the person's health and safety. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Alcohol Use Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Alcohol Use Change was calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control) .

Time frame:
1 months
Reported as:
Mean · change in score on a scale
Alcohol Use Change
change in score on a scaleWait GroupIntervention
Alcohol Use Change-0.03 ± 0.780 ± .95
Statistical analysis
  • Wait Group vs Intervention · t-test, 2 sided · p = .876964The change for each group was analyzed using a 2-tailed, unpaired, independent means, t test with 61 degrees of freedom.
SecondaryDepression Change

Depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionaire, PHQ-9 (modified to 6 questions). The PHQ is a screen where respondents indicate how often the respondent has experienced depressed mood and anhedonia over the prior two weeks. Selected questions (6) were used. Range: Minimum score: 0, Maximum score18. High scores indicate worse outcomes. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Depression Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Depression Change is calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control). See Baseline for more details

Time frame:
1 months
Reported as:
Mean · change in score on a scale
Depression Change
change in score on a scaleWait GroupIntervention
Depression Change-0.28 ± 1.96-0.53 ± 2.57
Statistical analysis
  • Wait Group vs Intervention · t-test, 2 sided · p = .66602The change for each group was analyzed using a 2-tailed, unpaired, independent means, with 61 degrees of freedom.
SecondaryResilience Change

Resilience was measured via the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale - modified to use 2 questions from the scale. Range: Minimum score: 0, Maximum score: 8. An increase means an improvement and higher scores mean better outcomes. A decrease means worsening; and lower values mean worse outcomes. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Resilience Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Resilience Change was calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control). See Baseline for more details.

Time frame:
1 months
Reported as:
Mean · Change in score on a scale
Resilience Change
Change in score on a scaleWait GroupIntervention
Resilience Change0.1 ± 1.216.26 ± 1.38
Statistical analysis
  • Wait Group vs Intervention · t-test, 2 sided · p = .726421Two-tailed unpaired t test comparing change for control (Pre to 2 weeks later) to case (Pre- to 2 weeks post) with 61 degrees of freedom.
SecondaryDrug Use Change

Drug use in the recent past was measured via the National Institute for Drug Abuse-Modified Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (modified to use 2 questions from this scale). Range: Minimum 0, Maximum score 10. High scores indicate more drug use and an increase means worse outcomes. Low scores mean less drug use and a decrease means better outcomes. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Drug Use Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Drug Use Change is calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control). See Baseline for more details.

Time frame:
1 months
Reported as:
Mean · change in score on a scale
Drug Use Change
change in score on a scaleWait GroupIntervention
Drug Use Change-0.07 ± 0.88-.09 ± 0.38
Statistical analysis
  • Wait Group vs Intervention · t-test, 2 sided · p = 0.908468The statistical test used was a 2 tailed, unpaired t test with 61 degrees of freedom.
SecondaryHappiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life)

Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life) were measured using the Medical Student Quality of Life Questionnaire with Nine Items (MSQoL9). The MSQoL is a linear self-assessment analog scale. It was modified to use only 5 of the questions from the scale that are on the domains of exhaustion and general happiness. Range for total score on the 5 questions: 1-25 Greater increase in scores means improvement; High scores indicate better outcomes. The analysis was modified so that high scores indicate a better quality of life for all questions. The Outcome Measure is the amount of Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life) Change from baseline (evaluation point #1) to evaluation point #2. Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life) Change was calculated for the intervention group pre intervention and 2 weeks post intervention (case) and pre intervention and after a 2 week waiting period for the Wait Group (Control).

Time frame:
2 weeks- 1 month
Reported as:
Mean · change in score on a scale
Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life)
change in score on a scaleWait GroupIntervention
Happiness and Exhaustion (Quality of Life)-0.52 ± 2.25-0.47 ± 2.34
Statistical analysis
  • Wait Group vs Intervention · t-test, 2 sided · p = .468104The groups were compared using a two tailed unpaired t test with 61 degrees of freedom.

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse event information was collected over the course of the study and for 1 month after, so 3 months total.. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Intervention0/34 (0%)0/34 (0%)0/34 (0%)
Wait Group0/29 (0%)0/29 (0%)0/29 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
<=18 years000
Between 18 and 65 years293463
>=65 years000
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
Female112637
Male18826
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race/Ethnicity, Customized(Participants)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
American Indian000
Asian/PI12921
Black or African American134
More than One Race437
Other123
Prefer Not To Answer101
Caucasian/White101727
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
United States293463
Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) (modified)
Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) (modified)(units on a scale)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
Mean41.34 ± 16.0941.44 ± 15.2241.40 ± 15.5
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Concise (AUDIT-C)
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Concise (AUDIT-C)(units on a scale)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
Mean3.07 ± 1.792.71 ± 1.492.87 ± 1.63
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) - modified
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) - modified(units on a scale)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
Mean4.55 ± 3.863.85 ± 3.434.17 ± 3.62
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC)(units on a scale)Wait GroupInterventionTotal
Mean5.83 ± 1.476.27 ± 1.566.06 ± 1.52

2 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.

08

Study locations

1 site
  • Clinical Tools, Inc.
    Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516, United States
09

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Dec 6, 2023

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 15, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04494633
Lead sponsor
Clinical Tools, Inc.
Collaborators
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 31, 2020
Start date
May 11, 2022
Primary completion
Jul 1, 2022
Completion
Jul 31, 2022
Results posted
Dec 15, 2023
Last update
Dec 15, 2023

Study contacts

Mary P Metcalf, PhD
principal investigator · Clinical Tools, Inc.

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion