LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Castro-Sánchez, Enrique; Kyratsis, Yiannis; Iwami, Michiyo; Rawson, Timothy M.; Holmes, Alison H. (2016)
Publisher: BioMed Central
Journal: Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Gamification, RC, Adoption, RC109-216, Serious game, Implementation, Infectious and parasitic diseases, Healthcare-associated infection, Scoping study, Research
Background The uptake of improvement initiatives in infection prevention and control (IPC) has often proven challenging. Innovative interventions such as ‘serious games’ have been proposed in other areas to educate and help clinicians adopt optimal behaviours. There is limited evidence about the application and evaluation of serious games in IPC. The purposes of the study were: a) to synthesise research evidence on the use of serious games in IPC to support healthcare workers’ behaviour change and best practice learning; and b) to identify gaps across the formulation and evaluation of serious games in IPC. Methods A scoping study was conducted using the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley. We interrogated electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar) in December 2015. Evidence from these studies was assessed against an analytic framework of intervention formulation and evaluation. Results Nine hundred sixty five unique papers were initially identified, 23 included for full-text review, and four finally selected. Studies focused on intervention inception and development rather than implementation. Expert involvement in game design was reported in 2/4 studies. Potential game users were not included in needs assessment and game development. Outcome variables such as fidelity or sustainability were scarcely reported. Conclusions The growing interest in serious games for health has not been coupled with adequate evaluation of processes, outcomes and contexts involved. Explanations about the mechanisms by which game components may facilitate behaviour change are lacking, further hindering adoption. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13756-016-0137-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.