Comparing the Outcomes of Virtual Reality-Based Serious Gaming and Lecture-Based Training for Advanced Life Support Training: Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparing Learning Outcomes of Machine-Guided Virtual Reality-Based Training With Educator-Guided Training in a Metaverse Environment: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Virtual reality (VR) modules are commonly used for health care training, such as adult advanced cardiac life support (ACLS), due to immersion and engagement. The metaverse differs from current VR serious gaming by enabling shared social connections, while current VR modules focus on computer-based content without social interaction. Educators in the metaverse can foster communication and collaboration during training sessions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare learning outcomes of VR-based, machine-guided training with educator-guided, VR-based training in the metaverse environment.

METHODS

A total of 62 volunteered students from Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University Vocational School for Anesthesiology were randomly divided into 2 groups of 31 participants each: one group received VR-based training with machine guidance (MG), and the other received VR-based training with educator guidance (EG) in the metaverse. The members of both groups undertook VR-based basic training for ACLS. Afterward, the MG group was trained with a VR-based advanced training module, which provides training with full MG, whereas the EG group attended the VR-based, educator-guided training in the metaverse. The primary outcome of the study was determined by the exam score of the VR-based training module. Descriptive statistics defined continuous variables such as VR exam scores and time spent on machine- or educator-guided training. The correlation between training time and VR exam scores was assessed with the Spearman rank correlation, and nonnormally distributed variables were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was set at P<.05, with analyses executed by MedCalc Statistical Software (version 12.7.7).

RESULTS

Comparing the VR test scores between the MG and EG groups revealed no statistically significant difference. The VR test scores for the EG group had a median of 86 (range 11-100). In contrast, the MG group scores had a median of 66 (range 13-100; P=.08). Regarding the correlation between the duration of machine-guided or educator-guided training and VR-based exam scores, for the MG group, =0.569 and P=.005 were obtained. For the EG group, this correlation was found to be =0.298 and P=.10. While this correlation is statistically significant for the MG group, it is not significant for the EG group. The post hoc power analysis (80%), considering the correlation between the time spent on training and exam scores, supported this finding.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that a well-designed, VR-based serious gaming module with MG could provide comparable learning outcomes to VR training in the metaverse with EG for adult ACLS training. Future research with a larger sample size could explore whether social interaction with educators in a metaverse environment offers added benefits for learners.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06288087; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06288087.

The Effects of Serious Games on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training and Education: Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Serious games have emerged as an innovative educational strategy with the potential to significantly enhance the quality and effectiveness of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training. Despite their promise, there remains a degree of controversy when comparing the advantages of serious games with traditional CPR training methods. This study seeks to provide a comprehensive assessment of the impact of serious games on CPR training and education by systematically analyzing the results of previous research.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effect of serious games on CPR training and education by summarizing and pooling the results of previous studies.

METHODS

We conducted a thorough and systematic search across 9 prominent web-based databases, encompassing the period from the inception of these databases until April 1, 2023. The databases included in our search were PubMed, Cochrane Library, Wiley Online Library, EBSCO (PsycInfo), SpringerLink, Chinese Biology Medicine Disc, Vip Journal Integration Platform, Wanfang Database, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure. The studies selected adhered to the following criteria: (1) being a randomized controlled trial comparing serious games and traditional methods for CPR training; (2) having participants aged 12 years or older in CPR; (3) having an experimental group using serious games and a control group using nongame methods for CPR instruction; and (4) having outcomes including theoretical and skill assessments, compression depth, and rate. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Data analysis was performed using RevMan (version 5.3; Cochrane Training), and mean differences (MDs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were used to calculate continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 9 articles were included, involving 791 study participants, of whom 395 in the experimental group taught CPR training using serious games and 396 in the control group taught CPR training using traditional methods. The results of our meta-analysis indicate that the use of serious games in CPR training yields outcomes that are comparable in effectiveness to traditional training methods across several key areas. Specifically, serious games demonstrated equivalence to traditional formats in theory assessment (SMD -0.22, 95% CI - 0.96 to 0.51; P=.55), skill assessment (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.55; P=.36), compression depth (MD -3.17, 95% CI -0.18 to 6.53; P=.06), and compression rate (MD -0.20, 95% CI -7.29 to 6.89; P=.96).

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, serious games offer a viable and effective CPR education approach, yielding results comparable to traditional formats. This modality is a valuable addition to CPR training methodologies. However, caution is warranted in interpreting these findings due to limited controlled trials, small sample sizes, and low-quality meta-analyzed evidence.