Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Serious Games

Date Submitted: Mar 31, 2024
Date Accepted: Sep 17, 2024
Date Submitted to PubMed: Sep 17, 2024

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Electronic Feedback Alone Versus Electronic Feedback Plus in-Person Debriefing for a Serious Game Designed to Teach Novice Anesthesiology Residents to Perform General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: Randomized Controlled Trial

Lee A, Goodman S, Chen CM, Landau R, Chatterji M

Electronic Feedback Alone Versus Electronic Feedback Plus in-Person Debriefing for a Serious Game Designed to Teach Novice Anesthesiology Residents to Perform General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: Randomized Controlled Trial

JMIR Serious Games 2024;12:e59047

DOI: 10.2196/59047

PMID: 39288282

PMCID: 11611795

Electronic feedback alone vs. electronic feedback plus in-person debriefing, for a serious game designed to teach novice anesthesiology residents to perform general anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial

  • Allison Lee; 
  • Stephanie Goodman; 
  • Chen Miao Chen; 
  • Ruth Landau; 
  • Madhabi Chatterji

ABSTRACT

Background:

EmergenCSimTM, is a novel researcher-developed serious game (SG) with an embedded scoring and feedback tool that reproduces an obstetric operating room environment. The learner must perform general anesthesia (GA) for emergent cesarean delivery (CD) for umbilical cord prolapse. Debriefing (facilitator-guided reflection) is integral to experiential learning but the optimal debriefing methods for SGs are unknown.

Objective:

We hypothesized that an in-person debriefing in addition to the SG-embedded electronic feedback will provide superior learning than electronic feedback alone.

Methods:

Novice 1st year anesthesiology residents (CA-1) (n=51) (i) watched a recorded lecture on GA for emergent CD, (ii) took a 26-item multiple-choice question (MCQ) pre-test, and (iii) played EmergenCSimTM (maximum score 196.5). They were randomized to either the control group which experienced the electronic feedback alone (Group EF, n=26) or the intervention group, which experienced the SG-embedded electronic feedback and an in-person debriefing (Group IPD+EF, n=25). All subjects played the SG a 2nd time, with instructions to try to increase their score, then they took a 26-item MCQ post-test. Pre-and post-tests (maximum score of 26 points each), were validated parallel forms.

Results:

For Groups EF and IPD+EF respectively, mean pre-test scores were18.6 (SD 2.5) and 19.4 (SD 2.3), and mean post-test scores were 22.6 (SD 2.2) and 22.1 (SD 1.6); F=1.8, p=0.185. SG scores for Groups EF and IPD+EF respectively were - mean 1st play SG scores of 135 (SE 4.4) and 141 (SE 4.5), and mean 2nd play SG scores were 163.1 (SE 2.9) and 173.3 (SE 2.9); F= 137.7, p < 0.001.

Conclusions:

Adding an in-person debriefing experience led to greater improvement in SG scores, emphasizing the learning benefits of this practice. Improved SG performance in both groups suggests that SGs have a role as independent, less resource-intensive educational tools. Clinical Trial: None


 Citation

Please cite as:

Lee A, Goodman S, Chen CM, Landau R, Chatterji M

Electronic Feedback Alone Versus Electronic Feedback Plus in-Person Debriefing for a Serious Game Designed to Teach Novice Anesthesiology Residents to Perform General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: Randomized Controlled Trial

JMIR Serious Games 2024;12:e59047

DOI: 10.2196/59047

PMID: 39288282

PMCID: 11611795

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.