Basic Life Support Training CourseNCT07286708
Serious Game vs Traditional BLS Training in Adolescents
A study testing Lifesaver Video Game CPR Training and Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training in people with Basic Life Support Training Course and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), run by Burcu SELVI CALSIKAN at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
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. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 15 to 17 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Basic Life Support Training Course, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)
- What is being tested?
- Lifesaver Video Game CPR Training and Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 117 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 22 Nov 2021to 2 Dec 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 15 to 17 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- 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
Who cannot join
- 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
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Istanbul Uskudar High School
Üsküdar, Istanbul, 34674
About this study
Official title: Effect of a Serious Video Game Versus Traditional Training on Basic Life Support Knowledge and Skills in Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial
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.
Read the detailed description
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.
- Being tested
- Lifesaver Video Game CPR Training, Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training
- Keywords
- Adolescent, Basic life support, Traditional Training, Serious Video Game
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Lifesaver Video Game CPR TrainingOther
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 TrainingOther
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.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Video Game-Based CPR Training Group | Active comparator | Participants in this arm received CPR training using the Lifesaver interactive video game developed by Resuscitation Council (UK). Training was completed individually under supervision using mobile phones. The video game provides a realistic CPR scenario and immediate feedback. No additional classical teaching was provided prior to the intervention. Receives: Other: Lifesaver Video Game CPR Training |
| Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training Group | Active comparator | Participants in this arm received traditional CPR training delivered by a certified instructor. Training included a theoretical lecture based on the Ministry of Health Adult Basic Life Support curriculum, followed by hands-on CPR practice using an adult manikin. Each session lasted approximately 2 hours. No video game or digital tool was used in this training. Receives: Other: Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in CPR Knowledge Score 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.
Measured: Baseline, 1 month after training, and 6 months after training
Secondary outcomes (1)
Change in CPR Skill Performance Score 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.
Measured: Baseline, 1 month, and 6 months after training
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Dec 2025
- Study start22 Nov 2021
- Primary completion17 Jun 2022
- Study completion2 Dec 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Basic Life Support Training CourseStudies 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
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Participants were randomly assigned to either the video game-based CPR training group or the traditional instructor-led CPR training group in a parallel two-arm design.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 117 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Burcu SELVI CALSIKAN
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Burcu SELVI CALSIKAN, Istanbul Arel University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07286708
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2020/177
- Status last verified
- Dec 2025
- First submitted
- 3 Dec 2025
- Last updated
- 17 Dec 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Dec 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of a Serious Video Game Versus Traditional Training on Basic Life Support Knowledge and Skills in Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07286708
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2020/177
- Keywords
- Adolescent, Basic life support, Traditional Training, Serious Video Game
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 117 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Burcu SELVI CALSIKANUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 22 Nov 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 17 Jun 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 2 Dec 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Dec 2025 (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.
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.
Detailed description
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Participants were randomly assigned to either the video game-based CPR training group or the traditional instructor-led CPR training group in a parallel two-arm design.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Video Game-Based CPR Training Group | Active comparator | Other: Lifesaver Video Game CPR TrainingParticipants in this arm received CPR training using the Lifesaver interactive video game developed by Resuscitation Council (UK). Training was completed individually under supervision using mobile phones. The video game provides a realistic CPR scenario and immediate feedback. No additional classical teaching was provided prior to the intervention. |
| Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training Group | Active comparator | Other: Traditional Instructor-Led CPR TrainingParticipants in this arm received traditional CPR training delivered by a certified instructor. Training included a theoretical lecture based on the Ministry of Health Adult Basic Life Support curriculum, followed by hands-on CPR practice using an adult manikin. Each session lasted approximately 2 hours. No video game or digital tool was used in this training. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 15 to 17 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 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
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- 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
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Lifesaver Video Game CPR TrainingThe 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. | Other | Video Game-Based CPR Training Group |
| Traditional Instructor-Led CPR TrainingParticipants 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. | Other | Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training Group |
Primary outcome
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.
1 secondary outcome
Change in CPR Skill Performance Score After Training
Time frame: Baseline, 1 month, and 6 months after training
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 17 Dec 2025.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Basic Life Support Training Course
Recruiting
Evaluation of Mixed Reality Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), Basic Life Support Training Course
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Lifesaver Video Game CPR Training and Traditional Instructor-Led CPR Training in people with Basic Life Support Training Course and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), run by Burcu SELVI CALSIKAN at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
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 5 inclusion and 3 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 17 Dec 2025. 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 Turkey (Türkiye). 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?
Change in CPR Knowledge Score After Training (time frame: Baseline, 1 month after training, and 6 months after training). 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 17 Dec 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.