Military medicine · 2026
Learning Triage in Disaster Medicine: A Comparative Study of Board and Digital Game-Based Formats Among Undergraduate Medical Students.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hölzl Sebastian, Oudintsov Elian Niklas, Hofmann Marko, Fellmer Felix, Erichsen Daniel, Holzhausen Ylva, Peters Harm, Back David Alexander
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Triage is crucial in managing mass casualty incidents (MCI) and requires training. Simulation-based approaches allow trainees to make mistakes without harming real patients. Digital methods may reduce cost and enable location-independent training. Although digital games have been compared with traditional teaching methods before, there is little research on direct comparison of non-digital and digital games.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study compared an existing MCI board game with a newly developed digital beta-version of this game, assessing collaboration, game experience, and triage quality (speed and accuracy) among undergraduate medical students. Sixty students were assigned to play either the board or digital version in groups of three. One game lasted 28 minutes. Participants rated collaboration and game experience using structured scoring tools.
RESULTS: Thirty students participated in each group. Collaboration scores did not differ significantly (P = .234). Board game players rated the game experience higher than digital players (P = .013) and performed a faster (P < .001) and more accurate (P = .009) triage. Both groups showed increased awareness of organizational (board game: P = .002; digital game: P < .001) and communication (board game: P = .007; digital game: P = .002) problems in MCI situations.
CONCLUSION: Collaboration did not differ between the formats. Although the board game yielded superior user experience and performance, both approaches improved understanding of organizational and communication issues. A digital game offers possibilities for location-independent training. The results indicate that game experience and user-friendliness should be considered when developing digital training methods.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study compared an existing MCI board game with a newly developed digital beta-version of this game, assessing collaboration, game experience, and triage quality (speed and accuracy) among undergraduate medical students. Sixty students were assigned to play either the board or digital version in groups of three. One game lasted 28 minutes. Participants rated collaboration and game experience using structured scoring tools.
RESULTS: Thirty students participated in each group. Collaboration scores did not differ significantly (P = .234). Board game players rated the game experience higher than digital players (P = .013) and performed a faster (P < .001) and more accurate (P = .009) triage. Both groups showed increased awareness of organizational (board game: P = .002; digital game: P < .001) and communication (board game: P = .007; digital game: P = .002) problems in MCI situations.
CONCLUSION: Collaboration did not differ between the formats. Although the board game yielded superior user experience and performance, both approaches improved understanding of organizational and communication issues. A digital game offers possibilities for location-independent training. The results indicate that game experience and user-friendliness should be considered when developing digital training methods.