. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Oct 1.

Published in final edited form as: Simul Healthc. 2015 Oct;10(5):270–276. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000096

Table 4.

Procedural protocol adherence (without prompting from supervisor) after standard training alone versus simulation training added to standard training

Procedural step	Standard training only^* (N=38)	Simulation plus standard training^* (N=49)	Relative risk (95% CI)	p value
Time out	29 (80.6)	43 (87.8)	1.09 (0.92 – 1.29)	0.33
Sterile technique	32 (86.5)	47 (97.9)	1.13 (1.00 – 1.28)	0.055
Vein visualized with ultrasound^†	33 (86.8)	49 (100)	—	—
Aspirates continually	33 (89.2)	46 (93.9)	1.05 (0.91 – 1.23)	0.49
Guidewire controlled	30 (81.1)	42 (87.5)	1.07 (0.87 – 1.32)	0.53
Venipuncture confirmed	24 (70.6)	42 (93.3)	1.32 (1.03 – 1.69)	0.026
Sharps controlled	29 (80.6)	45 (91.8)	1.17 (1.02 – 1.35)	0.026

Data are reported as N (%)

^†

Due to complete separation of outcomes by intervention group for “vein visualized with ultrasound,” relative risk regression cannot be applied to this outcome.