Poster Session I - A115 GAMING IN GASTROENTEROLOGY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

TL;DR

A study compared a serious game called PlayMed with written guidelines for teaching pediatric gastroenterology and found the game more engaging, though both had similar knowledge outcomes.

Contribution

This is the first randomized controlled trial evaluating a serious game for pediatric gastroenterology education using the Kirkpatrick Model of Evaluation.

Findings

Participants in the PlayMed group found the activity significantly more engaging and enjoyable compared to the guidelines group.

The guidelines group reported improved confidence in managing acute gastroenteritis but not acute pancreatitis.

Higher computer proficiency in the PlayMed group was linked to better self-perceived understanding of the material.

Abstract

Serious games (SGs) can augment medical education through technology-enhanced simulation. PlayMed (PM), a highly immersive and experiential SG, was designed to teach the clinical assessment and management of pediatric acute gastroenteritis (AG) and acute pancreatitis (AP).

To determine if the use of PM leads to superior outcomes based on the Kirkpatrick Model of Evaluation (KP) by assessing learner reaction (KP 1), knowledge acquisition (KP 2), and self-perceived behaviour (KP 3) compared to the use of written clinical guidelines (GL).

This is a randomized controlled trial among Pediatric residents at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario. Participants were block-randomized to the PM or GL group for one week and then completed a Likert-style questionnaire and 20 multiple choice questions (MCQs).

Twenty participants were randomized; 19 completed the assessment and were included in the analysis (PM n = 9, GL n = 10). No significant differences in baseline age or sex between groups. For KP 1, PM participants found the activity significantly more engaging (78% vs. 20%, p = 0.02) and enjoyed the design and elements (78% vs. 0%, p < 0.001) compared to the GL group. Although not statistically significant, more PM participants enjoyed the activity overall (44% vs. 10%) and enjoyed the format (56% vs. 40%). The GL group found the activity easy to use (100% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). For KP 2, the GL group reported improved understanding of the topics (100% vs. 44%, p = 0.01). However, there was no significant difference in MCQ scores between groups. For KP 3, the GL group reported improved confidence in managing AG (80% vs. 22%, p = 0.02), but no significant difference for AP. In the PM subset analysis, higher computer proficiency was significantly associated with improved self-perceived overall understanding (p = 0.04). Additionally, preference for simulation-based learning was significantly associated with enjoying PM and perceiving it as a practical and engaging way to develop clinical skills (p = 0.04 for both comparisons).

Overall, PM was more engaging and enjoyable compared to GL. In the PM group, preference for simulation-based learning was associated with enjoyment and self-perceived development of clinical skills. GL were reported as easier to use and demonstrated more confidence in managing AG.

None