Simulation is an education modality known to support clinical skill development. Unfortunately, access to simulation has been challenging, both prior to and during the pandemic. Simulation via telepractice, i.e., “telesimulation”, has emerged, but little is known about whether outcomes are comparable to in-person simulation. This study compared in-person versus telesimulation learner outcomes in an infant feeding scenario. The secondary aim was to compare outcomes between novice and experienced participants.This pragmatic randomized controlled trial included speech pathologists who could attend if randomized to the in-person modality. Block randomization matched participants with < 6 months’ infant feeding experience to those with > 6 months experience (2:1 ratio) into telesimulation or in-person simulation. Measures of clinical reasoning, confidence/anxiety, and satisfaction were collected, pre-, post-, and 4-weeks post-simulation.Overall, 39 clinicians completed either in-person simulation (n = 17) or telesimulation training (n = 22), including 16 experienced and 23 novice learners. Both in-person and telesimulation groups achieved significant improvements across time in clinical reasoning, self-reported confidence, and anxiety. The extent of change in clinical reasoning, confidence and anxiety was comparable between the telesimulation and in-person simulation groups. Comparing by experience, novice-level participants reported significantly greater changes in confidence and anxiety than experienced participants. Satisfaction levels were high regardless of simulation modality or experience.Participants in telesimulation and in-person simulation achieved similar improvements in the primary outcome measure of clinical reasoning, had comparable improvements in self-perceived confidence and anxiety, and demonstrated high satisfaction levels. Telesimulation is a promising means to improve clinician access to simulation training in infant feeding.
