Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07286708

Serious Game vs Traditional BLS Training in Adolescents

This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the effects of a serious video game and traditional training on adolescents' basic life support (BLS) knowledge and skills. The study was conducted at Üsküdar High School in Istanbul, Turkey, between November 2021 and June 2022. Eleventh-grade students aged 15-17 years who had not previously received BLS training were randomly assigned to a video game group or a traditional education group. A total of 117 students completed the study (58 in the video game group and 55 in the traditional education group). The video game group received BLS education using the Lifesaver serious game, while the traditional group received a lecture based on national BLS guidelines and hands-on practice with a CPR training manikin. BLS knowledge and skills were assessed at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months using validated knowledge and skill assessment forms. The primary objective was to determine whether the serious game improved BLS knowledge and skill scores compared with traditional training and whether the effect persisted at 1- and 6-month follow-up.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Basic Life Support Training Course Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)

Age range

15 year–17 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Istanbul Uskudar High School

Üsküdar, Istanbul, 34674, Turkey (Türkiye)

About this study

This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of a serious video game compared with traditional training on adolescents' basic life support (BLS) knowledge and skills. A total of 117 high school students (aged 15-17 years) were randomly assigned to either the video game group (Lifesaver interactive scenario) or the traditional lecture-plus-practice group. All participants completed baseline, 1-month, and 6-month assessments using a 15-item BLS knowledge test and a 22-item skill performance checklist completed on a CPR manikin.

The video game group received a 13-minute interactive scenario-based BLS training, while the control group received a guideline-based lecture and hands-on manikin practice. Outcomes included changes in BLS knowledge and skill scores over time and group differences in short- and long-term retention.

Data were analyzed using nonparametric tests due to non-normal distribution. The study aimed to determine whether the serious game improves BLS learning and retention compared with traditional instruction.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Students enrolled in the 11th grade at Üsküdar High School, Aged 15-17 years,
  • Volunteered to participate in the study,
  • Owns a smartphone capable of running the Lifesaver video game,
  • No health problems affecting verbal communication,
  • Provided written informed consent signed by both the student and their parent/guardian

Exclusion criteria

  • Received Basic Life Support (BLS/CPR) training within the past 12 months,
  • Transferred to another school during the study period,
  • Declined to participate or withdrew consent at any time

Treatment and study plan

Lifesaver Video Game CPR Training

Other

The Lifesaver video game is an interactive, scenario-based CPR training tool developed by the Resuscitation Council (UK). Participants use their mobile phones to complete a simulated cardiac arrest scenario involving a teenage victim. The game teaches recognition of cardiac arrest, calling emergency services, performing chest compressions, rescue breaths, and AED use. Training was completed individually under supervision.

Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training

Other

Participants received a traditional instructor-led CPR training consisting of a theoretical lecture based on the Ministry of Health Adult Basic Life Support guidelines and hands-on CPR practice using an adult manikin. Training lasted approximately 2 hours and did not include any digital or game-based components.

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in CPR Knowledge Score After Training

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 month after training, and 6 months after training

    A multiple-choice CPR knowledge assessment consisting of 15 items was used to measure adolescents' theoretical understanding of adult Basic Life Support. Each correct answer was scored as 1 point, with total scores ranging from 0 to 15. Knowledge scores were measured at baseline (pre-test), 1 month after training, and 6 months after training in both groups. The primary outcome is the change in knowledge score from baseline to follow-up.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in CPR Skill Performance Score After Training

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 month, and 6 months after training

    A 22-item CPR skill performance checklist scored using a 3-point Likert scale (0 = insufficient, 1 = needs improvement, 2 = sufficient), with total scores ranging from 0 to 44. Skill performance was assessed using an adult CPR manikin at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months after training. The outcome reflects changes in CPR skill competency over time.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Burcu SELVI CALSIKAN

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Effect of a Serious Video Game Versus Traditional Training on Basic Life Support Knowledge and Skills in Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Dec 16, 2025
Registry last updated
Dec 17, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.