Assessing validity evidence for a serious game dedicated to patient clinical deterioration and communication

Advances in Simulation

Table 4 Scores and playing time for the three groups

	Group S n = 25	Group R n = 25	Group E n = 21	p
Scores (score: 50 to 100)
Post-operative haemorrhage scenario	45.5 ± 24.7 ^£	48.0 ± 19.6	41.9 ± 28.9	0.69
Brain trauma scenario	31.9 ± 31.3	38.4 ± 38	39.1 ± 44.5	0.77
Obstructed intestinal tract scenario	42.6 ± 21.6	33.7 ± 22.9	45.7 ± 21.5	0.16
Playtime (minutes)
Post-operative haemorrhage scenario	25.7 ± 6.3 ^£	24.9 ± 7.3	25.6 ± 9.6	0.92
Brain trauma scenario	33.5 ± 7.7	28.5 ± 6.5	31.7 ± 10.5	0.10
Obstructed intestinal tract scenario	30 ± ± 7.3	29.4 ± 9.0	28.3 ± 7.4	0.75

Results are described by means ± SD and compared using ANOVA (followed by post hoc comparison when significant). The participant’s actions were assigned neutral, negative or positive points, as defined by the pedagogical team. The score and playing time were generated automatically by the serious game software
*p value < 0.05 was considered significant between groups S, R, and E
^£n = 24 because one student experienced a technical problem with data recording in case 1 which could not be stored for analysis

ISSN: 2059-0628