Research AppraisalRandomised Controlled Trial

Using Serious Games to Increase the Implementation of Trauma Triage Guidelines: A Randomized Clinical Trial

JAMAMohan, Deepika, Chang, Chung-Chou H, Fischhoff, Baruch et al.19 May 2026DOI

Clinical Snapshot

80CEBM
Evidence: StrongRandomised Controlled Trial

PICO Framework

P — Population800 emergency physicians responsible for triage of Medicare fee-for-service injured patients ≥65 years at emergency departments within non-trauma centers in the US
I — InterventionTheory-based serious game training (2-hour initial session plus 20-minute quarterly sessions for 4 doses)
C — ComparatorUsual education
O — OutcomesPrimary: undertriage proportion (severely injured patients not transferred to trauma centers); Secondary: overtriage proportion, composite 30-day mortality/readmission

Bottom Line

This large randomized trial demonstrates that a theory-based serious game training program significantly reduces undertriage of severely injured older adults by emergency physicians in non-trauma centers. The intervention achieved a clinically meaningful 7% absolute reduction in undertriage (NNT=13) with a low-cost, scalable approach requiring only 2 hours initial training plus quarterly 20-minute sessions. With 99% uptake and demonstrated effectiveness across 1147 hospitals, this represents a practical solution to a persistent patient safety problem. The intervention appears highly applicable to Australian emergency medicine practice and could complement existing trauma education programs. While the study lacks blinding and detailed baseline comparisons, the large sample size, multisite design, and clinically relevant outcomes provide strong evidence for implementation. The lack of effect on overtriage or clinical outcomes suggests the intervention specifically improves appropriate trauma center transfers without increasing unnecessary transfers or immediate patient outcomes.

Evidence: Strong

Key Findings

  • P Value: P = 0.02

  • Effect Size: 7% absolute reduction in undertriage

  • Primary Outcome: Undertriage proportion: 49% (intervention) vs 57% (control)

  • Nnt Or Sensitivity: NNT = 13 (approximately 13 physicians need training to prevent one case of undertriage)

  • Confidence Interval: -13% to -0.8%

Clinical Application

Highly feasible - low-cost tablet-based intervention requiring minimal time commitment Directly applicable to Australian emergency departments. Aligns with ACEM trauma guidelines and could complement existing EMST training programs. Cost-effective intervention suitable for implementation across state health systems Emergency physicians in non-trauma centers managing older adult trauma patients

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Low-cost methods that improve physician adherence to clinical guidelines are lacking. Trauma triage exemplifies time-sensitive conditions where guideline adherence remains at 50% or less despite stakeholder efforts, particularly when treating older adults. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a theory-based serious game (a purpose-driven video game) improves emergency physician adherence to trauma triage guidelines for older adults. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized clinical trial recruited 800 emergency physicians responsible for the triage of Medicare fee-for-service injured patients (≥65 years of age) at emergency departments within nontrauma centers in the US. Physician enrollment began November 27, 2023, and concluded February 7, 2024. Data collection began January 1, 2024 (or the date of enrollment), and ended February 6, 2025. The patients were treated during the 1 year after physician enrollment. INTERVENTIONS: Game-based training on a tablet for an initial session of 2 hours and then a 20-minute session each quarter (4 doses; n = 400 physicians) vs usual education (n = 400 physicians). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was undertriage (defined as the proportion of severely injured patients not transferred to trauma centers) during the year after randomization. The secondary outcomes were overtriage (defined as the proportion of transferred patients with minor injuries) and a composite clinical outcome of 30-day mortality or hospital readmission. Medicare fee-for-service claims were analyzed using mixed-effects regression models. RESULTS: Of the 800 physicians, the length of experience was a median of 10 (IQR, 6-17) years in practice, 71% were male (563/789), and 750 (94%) had completed Advanced Trauma Life Support. The physicians worked at 1147 hospitals and treated 41 073 injured Medicare patients, of whom 1738 (4.2%) had severe injuries. Of the physicians in the game-based training (intervention) group, 99% (397/399) received 1 dose and 67% (268/399) received 4 doses. Physicians in the game-based training group had a lower proportion of severely injured older adults who were undertriaged (49%; 402/819) compared with the usual education (control) group (57%; 527/919) (model-adjusted difference, -7% [95% CI, -13% to -0.8%]; P = .02). The model-adjusted difference did not differ for the outcomes of overtriage (-3% [95% CI, -6% to 1%]; P = .14) and the composite outcome (-0.4% [95% CI, -5% to 4%]; P = .87). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among physicians responsible for the triage of patients in emergency departments of nontrauma centers, use of a theory-based serious game decreased the proportion of severely injured patients who were undertriaged. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06063434.

References

  1. 1.Mohan, D., Chang, C. H., Fischhoff, B., Elmer, J., Rak, K. J., Barnes, J. L., Peitzman, A. B., Bendesky, B., Carr, C., Chapman, A. C., Forsythe, R. M., Guyette, F. X., Hynes, A. M., Oskvarek, J. J., Weingart, S. D., Weinstock, M. B., White, D. B., & Angus, D. C. (2026). Using serious games to increase the implementation of trauma triage guidelines: A randomized clinical trial. *JAMA*. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e318270191f
Share:XLinkedIn

This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service