Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33685854›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2021

Impact of a Serious Game (Escape COVID-19) on the Intention to Change COVID-19 Control Practices Among Employees of Long-term Care Facilities: Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial.

Mélanie Suppan, Mohamed Abbas, Gaud Catho, Loric Stuby, Simon Regard, Sophia Achab, Stephan Harbarth, Laurent Suppan

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Developing critical thinking skills through gamification.Thinking skills and creativity · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mélanie SuppanDivision of Anesthesiology, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8807-9619
Mohamed Abbas *Infection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7265-1887
Gaud Catho *Infection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4948-0944
Loric Stuby *Genève TEAM Ambulances, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-1663-5249
Simon RegardDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3979-7593
Sophia AchabSpecialized Facility in Behavioral Addictions ReConnecte, University of Geneva Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3861-3297
Stephan HarbarthInfection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3551-1025
Laurent SuppanDivision of Emergency Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6989-6421
University of Geneva · CHHES-SO Genève · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are at high risk of complications and death following SARS-CoV-2 infection. In these facilities, viral transmission can be facilitated by shortages of human and material resources, which can lead to suboptimal application of infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures. To improve the dissemination of COVID-19 IPC guidelines, we developed a serious game called "Escape COVID-19" using Nicholson's RECIPE for meaningful gamification, as engaging serious games have the potential to induce behavioral change.

objectiveAs the probability of executing an action is strongly linked to the intention of performing it, the objective of this study was to determine whether LTCF employees were willing to change their IPC practices after playing "Escape COVID-19."

methodsThis was a web-based, triple-blind, randomized controlled trial, which took place between November 5 and December 4, 2020. The health authorities of Geneva, Switzerland, asked the managers of all LTCFs under their jurisdiction to forward information regarding the study to all their employees, regardless of professional status. Participants were unaware that they would be randomly allocated to one of two different study paths upon registration. In the control group, participants filled in a first questionnaire designed to gather demographic data and assess baseline knowledge before accessing regular online IPC guidelines. They then answered a second questionnaire, which assessed their willingness to change their IPC practices and identified the reasons underlying their decision. They were then granted access to the serious game. Conversely, the serious game group played "Escape COVID-19" after answering the first questionnaire but before answering the second one. This group accessed the control material after answering the second set of questions. There was no time limit. The primary outcome was the proportion of LTCF employees willing to change their IPC practices. Secondary outcomes included the factors underlying participants' decisions, the domains these changes would affect, changes in the use of protective equipment items, and attrition at each stage of the study.

resultsA total of 295 answer sets were analyzed. Willingness to change behavior was higher in the serious game group (82% [119/145] versus 56% [84/150]; P<.001), with an odds ratio of 3.86 (95% CI 2.18-6.81; P<.001) after adjusting for professional category and baseline knowledge, using a mixed effects logistic regression model with LTCF as a random effect. For more than two-thirds (142/203) of the participants, the feeling of playing an important role against the epidemic was the most important factor explaining their willingness to change behavior. Most of the participants unwilling to change their behavior answered that they were already applying all the guidelines.

conclusionsThe serious game "Escape COVID-19" was more successful than standard IPC material in convincing LTCF employees to adopt COVID-19-safe IPC behavior. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/25595.

Indexed as

Video GamesCOVID-19Disease Transmission, InfectiousFemaleHumansInfection ControlIntentionInternetLong-Term CareMaleSARS-CoV-2controlCOVID-19elderlygamehealth care workerimpactinfection preventionintentionlong-term care facilitiesnursing homesrandomized controlled trialSARS-CoV-2serious gametransmission

Identifiers

PMID33685854
PMCPMC7996198
OpenAlexW3134899973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.