Nursing EducationNCT06531187
Gamification Design in Evidence-Based Education for Clinical Nurses
A study testing Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Teaching in people with Nursing Education and Evidence-Based Practice, run by Ling-Yu Chien at 1 site in Taiwan.
Trial summary
The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of gamification versus group discussion in evidence-based practice (EBP) education for clinical nurses. It aims to improve learning outcomes and clinical application of EBP. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 65 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Nursing Education, Evidence-Based Practice
- What is being tested?
- Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Teaching
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 102 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTaiwan
- Study dates
- 9 Apr 2020to 12 Jul 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 to 65 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Active clinical nurses aged 20-65. Clinical nurses within the hospital who registered for the workshop via e-learning.
- Nurses with more than three months of work experience and a signed contract.
Who cannot join
- Nurses with less than three months of work experience or without a signed contract.
- Participants cannot simultaneously attend both types of courses. Nurses at level N2 or above, nurses from other hospitals, nurse practitioners, or nursing supervisors are not included in this study.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Applying Innovative Gamification Education in Evidence-Based Practice for Clinical Nurses
The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of gamification versus group discussion in evidence-based practice (EBP) education for clinical nurses. It aims to improve learning outcomes and clinical application of EBP.
Read the detailed description
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Does gamification enhance the knowledge acquisition of clinical nurses in EBP? What barriers to evidence-based practice do nurses face? How does gamification affect cognitive load, self-efficacy, and attitudes towards EBP? Researchers will compare gamification to traditional group discussion methods to evaluate their impact on clinical practice.
Participants will:
Be clinical nurses from Tri-Service General Hospital with varying ranks and experiences.
Be randomly assigned to either the gamification group or the control group. Participate in EBP courses based on their clinical rank and experience. Complete pre- and post-intervention assessments and a six-month follow-up. Data collection will measure barriers to evidence-based practice, cognitive load, knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, attitudes, course satisfaction, and practical application through written reports. Data analysis will use descriptive and inferential statistics to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions.
This study aims to provide evidence on the most effective teaching methods for EBP, contributing to improved educational strategies and better clinical practices for nurses.
- Conditions
- Nursing Education, Evidence-Based Practice
- Being tested
- Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Teaching
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) TeachingOther
The experimental group will receive a 4-hour gamified instructional design course focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), based on the Octalysis Framework of game elements proposed by Chou (2019).
The active comparator group will participate in 4-hour conventional small group discussions focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| gamified group | Experimental | The experimental group will receive a 4-hour gamified instructional design course focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), based on the Octalysis Framework of game elements proposed by Chou (2019). Receives: Other: Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Teaching |
| conventional small group discussion | Active comparator | The active comparator group will participate in 4-hour conventional small group discussions focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP). Receives: Other: Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Teaching |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
EBP Competence
Measured using the ACE tool developed by Ilic et al. (2014).
Measured: Baseline, immediately after the workshop, and 6 months follow-up
Self-Efficacy and attitudes
Assessed using the Taipei Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (TEBPQ) (Chen et al., 2014).
Measured: Baseline, immediately after the workshop, and 6 months follow-up
Participant Satisfaction with EBP Teaching
Measured using a questionnaire designed specifically for this study.
Measured: immediately after the workshop
practicing applicability
The patient care report was then submitted for a panel of experts' review.
Measured: 6 months follow-up
Secondary outcomes (2)
Cognitive Load
Assessed using items referenced from Albarqouni et al. (2018).
Measured: Baseline, and 6 months follow-up
Barriers
Measured using the Chinese Evidence-Based Practice Scales (Wang et al., 2012).
Measured: Baseline, and 6 months follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted31 Jul 2024
- Study start9 Apr 2020
- Primary completion12 Jul 2022
- Study completion12 Jul 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Nursing EducationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 102 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ling-Yu Chien
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Ling-Yu Chien, National Defense Medical Center, Taiwan
- Investigators
- Ling-Yu Chien, Study director, National Defense Medical Center, Taiwan
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06531187
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- B202005016
- Status last verified
- Jul 2024
- First submitted
- 28 Jul 2024
- Last updated
- 31 Jul 2024
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 Jul 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Applying Innovative Gamification Education in Evidence-Based Practice for Clinical Nurses
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06531187
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- B202005016
- Conditions
- Nursing Education, Evidence-Based Practice
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 102 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ling-Yu ChienUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 9 Apr 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 12 Jul 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 31 Jul 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of gamification versus group discussion in evidence-based practice (EBP) education for clinical nurses. It aims to improve learning outcomes and clinical application of EBP.
Detailed description
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Does gamification enhance the knowledge acquisition of clinical nurses in EBP? What barriers to evidence-based practice do nurses face? How does gamification affect cognitive load, self-efficacy, and attitudes towards EBP? Researchers will compare gamification to traditional group discussion methods to evaluate their impact on clinical practice.
Participants will:
Be clinical nurses from Tri-Service General Hospital with varying ranks and experiences.
Be randomly assigned to either the gamification group or the control group. Participate in EBP courses based on their clinical rank and experience. Complete pre- and post-intervention assessments and a six-month follow-up. Data collection will measure barriers to evidence-based practice, cognitive load, knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, attitudes, course satisfaction, and practical application through written reports. Data analysis will use descriptive and inferential statistics to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions.
This study aims to provide evidence on the most effective teaching methods for EBP, contributing to improved educational strategies and better clinical practices for nurses.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| gamified group | Experimental | Other: Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) TeachingThe experimental group will receive a 4-hour gamified instructional design course focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), based on the Octalysis Framework of game elements proposed by Chou (2019). |
| conventional small group discussion | Active comparator | Other: Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) TeachingThe active comparator group will participate in 4-hour conventional small group discussions focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Active clinical nurses aged 20-65. Clinical nurses within the hospital who registered for the workshop via e-learning.
- Nurses with more than three months of work experience and a signed contract.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Nurses with less than three months of work experience or without a signed contract.
- Participants cannot simultaneously attend both types of courses. Nurses at level N2 or above, nurses from other hospitals, nurse practitioners, or nursing supervisors are not included in this study.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) TeachingThe experimental group will receive a 4-hour gamified instructional design course focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP), based on the Octalysis Framework of game elements proposed by Chou (2019). The active comparator group will participate in 4-hour conventional small group discussions focused on teaching Evidence-Based Practice (EBP). | Other | conventional small group discussion, gamified group |
Primary outcome
EBP Competence
Time frame: Baseline, immediately after the workshop, and 6 months follow-up
Measured using the ACE tool developed by Ilic et al. (2014).
Self-Efficacy and attitudes
Time frame: Baseline, immediately after the workshop, and 6 months follow-up
Assessed using the Taipei Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (TEBPQ) (Chen et al., 2014).
Participant Satisfaction with EBP Teaching
Time frame: immediately after the workshop
Measured using a questionnaire designed specifically for this study.
practicing applicability
Time frame: 6 months follow-up
The patient care report was then submitted for a panel of experts' review.
2 secondary outcomes
Cognitive Load
Time frame: Baseline, and 6 months follow-up
Barriers
Time frame: Baseline, and 6 months follow-up
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 31 Jul 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Nursing Education
Recruiting
Environmental Sustainability-Focused Service-Learning for Nursing Students
Sustainable Consumption Behavior, Sustainability Attitudes
Recruiting
The Effect of Web-Based Simulation and Flipped Learning on Blood Pressure Education
Education, Education Nursing
Not yet recruiting
Artificial Intelligence Powered Digital Education Based on the Neuman Systems Model for Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Radiotherap
Breast Cancer, Radiodermatitis
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of Health Belief Model-Based HPV Infection and Vaccination Education on University Students' Knowledge and Health Beliefs
Health Belief Model, Nursing Students
Recruiting
Effect of Solution-Focused Approach Education on Breastfeeding Avoidance and Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy in Primiparous Mothers
Breastfeeding Avoidance and Breastfeeding Self-efficacy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ling-Yu Chien study director
National Defense Medical Center, Taiwan
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Teaching in people with Nursing Education and Evidence-Based Practice, run by Ling-Yu Chien at 1 site in Taiwan.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 Jul 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Taiwan. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
EBP Competence (time frame: Baseline, immediately after the workshop, and 6 months follow-up). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 Jul 2024.