Games to support teaching clinical reasoning in health professions education: a scoping review

ABSTRACT

Introduction

Given the complexity of teaching clinical reasoning to (future) healthcare professionals, the utilization of serious games has become popular for supporting clinical reasoning education. This scoping review outlines games designed to support teaching clinical reasoning in health professions education, with a specific emphasis on their alignment with the 8-step clinical reasoning cycle and the reflective practice framework, fundamental for effective learning.

Methods

A scoping review using systematic searches across seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) was conducted. Game characteristics, technical requirements, and incorporation of clinical reasoning cycle steps were analyzed. Additional game information was obtained from the authors.

Results

Nineteen unique games emerged, primarily simulation and escape room genres. Most games incorporated the following clinical reasoning steps: patient consideration (step 1), cue collection (step 2), intervention (step 6), and outcome evaluation (step 7). Processing information (step 3) and understanding the patient’s problem (step 4) were less prevalent, while goal setting (step 5) and reflection (step 8) were least integrated.

Conclusion

All serious games reviewed show potential for improving clinical reasoning skills, but thoughtful alignment with learning objectives and contextual factors is vital. While this study aids health professions educators in understanding how games may support teaching of clinical reasoning, further research is needed to optimize their effective use in education. Notably, most games lack explicit incorporation of all clinical reasoning cycle steps, especially reflection, limiting its role in reflective practice. Hence, we recommend prioritizing a systematic clinical reasoning model with explicit reflective steps when using serious games for teaching clinical reasoning.

KEYWORDS:

• Clinical reasoning
• serious games
• reflective practice
• problem-solving
• experimental learning
• medical education
• critical thinking

Acknowledgments

Our gratitude extends to Laura Verbeij (LV), lecturer in the Bachelor of Nursing program at the University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, for her valuable support throughout the process of study selection.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethics statement

Since this study involved a scoping review of published literature, obtaining ethics approval was not applicable.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2316971.

Additional information

Funding

Doctoral research grant University of Applied Sciences Utrecht.