Background: The uptake of improvement initiatives in infection prevention and control (IPC) has often proven
challenging. Innovative interventions such as ‘serious games’ have been proposed in other areas to educate and
help clinicians adopt optimal behaviours. There is limited evidence about the application and evaluation of serious
games in IPC. The purposes of the study were: a) to synthesise research evidence on the use of serious games in
IPC to support healthcare workers’ behaviour change and best practice learning; and b) to identify gaps across the
formulation and evaluation of serious games in IPC.
Methods: A scoping study was conducted using the methodological framework developed by Arksey and
O’Malley. We interrogated electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus,
Cochrane, Google Scholar) in December 2015. Evidence from these studies was assessed against an analytic
framework of intervention formulation and evaluation.
Results: Nine hundred sixty five unique papers were initially identified, 23 included for full-text review, and four
finally selected. Studies focused on intervention inception and development rather than implementation. Expert
involvement in game design was reported in 2/4 studies. Potential game users were not included in needs
assessment and game development. Outcome variables such as fidelity or sustainability were scarcely reported.
Conclusions: The growing interest in serious games for health has not been coupled with adequate evaluation of
processes, outcomes and contexts involved. Explanations about the mechanisms by which game components may
facilitate behaviour change are lacking, further hindering adoption.