The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to assess if serious games impact health outcomes for children less than 18 years of age with chronic diseases. Additionally, the impact of self-efficacy, adherence, knowledge, use of theory, parent involvement, and study quality was also examined.
Materials and Methods:
Searches were conducted in databases EBSCO, PubMed, and Web of Science between June and August 2016. Randomized controlled trials using a serious game as an intervention, for participants under 18 years of age, to improve their chronic disease were included.
Results:
Data were extracted by two independent researchers, including: Title, author, and publication year; chronic disease; game description; number and age of participants; intervention duration; significant findings; parent involvement; theory; and study quality. Any disagreements were tackled and consensus was achieved. Eighteen studies were included in the review. The areas of health addressed included cerebral palsy, asthma, diabetes, developmental coordination disorders, and vision disorders. In these articles, eight health outcome variables were measured, including: lung function, glycemic control, hospital visits, motor proficiency, and visual acuity. Psychosocial variables that were assessed included self-efficacy and knowledge. Two articles included parents in the intervention, and three articles used theory. Six studies had significant health outcome finding, and four studies found a significant change in one psychosocial variable.
Conclusion:
This review demonstrates the potential for games to improve health outcomes of young individuals. However, the mixed results suggest that more serious game interventions need to be better designed and rigorously tested to support their impact on improving health outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GerteisJ, IzraelD, DeitzD, LeRoyL, RicciardiR, MillerT, BasuJ. Multiple chronic conditions chartbook: medical expenditure panel survey data. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014.
2.
YeoM, SawyerS. Chronic illness and disability. BMJ, 2005; 330:721–723.
3.
Thompson, CullenKW, RedondoMJ, AndersonB. Use of relational agents to improve family communication in type 1 diabetes: Methods. JMIR Res Protoc, 2016; 5:e151.
4.
ZanchiC, PresserAL, VaheyP. Next generation preschool math demo: Tablet games for preschool classrooms. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. NewYork, NY: ACM; 2013.
5.
RileyD. Among American Kids Ages 2–17, 82 Percent Report They Are Gamers. The NPD Group, Inc., 2009.
6.
FuchslocherA, NiesenhausJ, KrämerN. Serious games for health: An empirical study of the game “Balance” for teenagers with diabetes mellitus. Entertainment Comput, 2011; 2:97–101.
7.
SusiT, JohannessonM, BacklundP. Serious games: An overview. Skövde: Institutionen för kommunikation och information; 2007.
8.
ZoccolilloL, MorelliD, CincottiF, et al.Video-game based therapy performed by children with cerebral palsy: A cross-over randomized controlled trial and a cross-sectional quantitative measure of physical activity. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2015; 51:669–676.
9.
WadeW, PorterD. Sitting playfully: Does the use of a centre of gravity computer game controller influence the sitting ability of young people with cerebral palsy?. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 2012; 7:122–129.
10.
VilozniD, BarkerM, JellouschekH, HeimannG, BlauH. An interactive computer-animated system (SpiroGame) facilitates spirometry in preschool children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 2001; 164:2200–2205.
11.
StrakerL, HowieE, SmithA, et al.A crossover randomised and controlled trial of the impact of active video games on motor coordination and perceptions of physical ability in children at risk of Developmental Coordination Disorder. Hum Mov Sci, 2015; 42:146–160.
12.
SalemY, GropackSJ, CoffinD, GodwinEM. Effectiveness of a low-cost virtual reality system for children with developmental delay: A preliminary randomised single-blind controlled trial. Physiotherapy, 2012; 98:189–195.
13.
SabelM, SjölundA, BroerenJ, et al.Active video gaming improves body coordination in survivors of childhood brain tumours. Disabil Rehabil, 2016; 38:2073–2084.
14.
PrestonN, WeightmanA, GallagherJ, et al.A pilot single-blind multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate the potential benefits of computer-assisted arm rehabilitation gaming technology on the arm function of children with spastic cerebral palsy. Clin Rehabil, 2016; 30:1004–1015.
15.
HerbisonN, MacKeithD, VivianA, et al.Randomised controlled trial of video clips and interactive games to improve vision in children with amblyopia using the I-BiT system. Br J Ophthalmol, 2016; 100:1511–1516.
16.
GomesEL, CarvalhoCR, Peixoto-SouzaFS, et al.Active video game exercise training improves the clinical control of asthma in children: Randomized controlled trial. PLoS One, 2015; 10:e0135433.
17.
ChiuH-C, AdaL, LeeH-M. Upper limb training using Wii Sports Resort™ for children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy: A randomized, single-blind trial. Clin Rehabil, 2014; 28:1015–1024.
18.
AlSaifAA, AlsenanyS. Effects of interactive games on motor performance in children with spastic cerebral palsy. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015; 27:2001–2003.
19.
DeShazoJ, HarrisL, PrattW. Effective intervention or child's play? A review of video games for diabetes education. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2010; 12:815–822.
20.
GuyS, Ratzki-LeewingA, Gwadry-SridharF. Moving beyond the stigma: Systematic review of video games and their potential to combat obesity. Int J Hypertens, 2011; 2011:179124.
21.
KatoPM. Video games in health care: Closing the gap. Rev Gen Psychol, 2010; 14:113.
22.
PapastergiouM. Exploring the potential of computer and video games for health and physical education: A literature review. Comput Educ, 2009; 53:603–622.
23.
Bussey-SmithKL, RossenRD. A systematic review of randomized control trials evaluating the effectiveness of interactive computerized asthma patient education programs. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 2007; 98:507–516.
24.
ChristensenJ, ValentinerLS, PetersenRJ, LangbergH. The effect of game-based interventions in rehabilitation of diabetics: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Telemed J E Health, 2016; 22:789–797.
25.
LazemS, WebsterM, HolmesW, WolfM. Games and diabetes a review investigating theoretical frameworks, evaluation methodologies, and opportunities for design grounded in learning theories. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015; 10:447–452.
26.
CharlierN, ZupancicN, FieuwsS, et al.Serious games for improving knowledge and self-management in young people with chronic conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc, 2015; 23:ocv100.
27.
PrimackBA, CarrollMV, McNamaraM, et al.Role of video games in improving health-related outcomes: A systematic review. Am J Prev Med, 2012; 42:630–638.
28.
KatoPM, ColeSW, BradlynAS, PollockBH. A video game improves behavioral outcomes in adolescents and young adults with cancer: A randomized trial. Pediatrics, 2008; 122:e305–e317.
29.
StreisandR, SwiftE, WickmarkT, et al.Pediatric parenting stress among parents of children with type 1 diabetes: The role of self-efficacy, responsibility, and fear. J Pediatr Psychol, 2005; 30:513–521.
30.
MoherD, LiberatiA, TetzlaffJ, AltmanDG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 2009; 6:e10000097.
31.
CostikyanG. I have no words & I must design: Toward a critical vocabulary for games. In Proceedings of Computer Games and Digital Cultures Conference. Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2003, pp. 9–33.
32.
TorpyJM. Campbell A, Glass RM. Chronic diseases of children. JAMA, 2010; 303:682–682.
33.
BrownSJ, LiebermanDA, GemenyBA, et al.Educational video game for juvenile diabetes: Results of a controlled trial. Med Inform, 1997; 22:77–89.
34.
HammondJ, JonesV, HillEL, GreenD, MaleI. An investigation of the impact of regular use of the Wii Fit to improve motor and psychosocial outcomes in children with movement difficulties: A pilot study. Child Care Health Dev, 2014; 40:165–175.
35.
ShamesRS, SharekP, MayerM, et al.Effectiveness of a multicomponent self-management program in at-risk, school-aged children with asthma. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol, 2004; 92:611–618.
36.
HomerC, SusskindO, AlpertHR, et al.An evaluation of an innovative multimedia educational software program for asthma management: Report of a randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics, 2000; 106(Supplement 1):210–215.
37.
HussK, WinkelsteinM, NandaJ, et al.Computer game for inner-city children does not improve asthma outcomes. J Pediatr Health Care, 2003; 17:72–78.
38.
KumarVS, et al.The DAILY (Daily Automated Intensive Log for Youth) trial: A wireless, portable system to improve adherence and glycemic control in youth with diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2004; 6:445–453.
39.
RubinDH, LeventhalJM, SadockRT, et al.Educational intervention by computer in childhood asthma: A randomized clinical trial testing the use of a new teaching intervention in childhood asthma. Pediatrics, 1986; 77:1–10.
40.
DeSmetA, Van RyckeghemD, CompernolleS, et al.A meta-analysis of serious digital games for healthy lifestyle promotion. Prev Med, 2014; 69:95–107.
41.
AndersonBJ, et al.Family conflict, adherence, and glycaemic control in youth with short duration type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med, 2002; 19:635–642.
42.
AndersonBJ, et al.An office-based intervention to maintain parent-adolescent teamwork in diabetes management. Impact on parent involvement, family conflict, and subsequent glycemic control. Diabetes Care, 1999; 22:713–721.
43.
MancusoCA, RinconM, McCullochCE, CharlsonME. Self-efficacy, depressive symptoms, and patients' expectations predict outcomes in asthma. Medical Care, 2001; 39:1326–1338.
44.
LandisSC, AmaraSG, AsadullahK, et al.A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature, 2012; 490:187.
45.
SaudekCD, BrickJC. The Clinical Use of Hemoglobin A1c. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2009.
46.
HeklerEB, MichieS, PavelM, et al.Advancing models and theories for digital behavior change interventions. Am J Prev Med, 2016; 51:825–832.
47.
NicholsL, IslasA. Pushing and pulling emerging adults through college: College generational status and the influence of parents and others in the first year. J Adolesc Res, 2015; 31:59–95.
48.
ZiaianT, SawyerMG, ReynoldsKE, et al.Treatment burden and health‐related quality of life of children with diabetes, cystic fibrosis and asthma. J Paediatr Child Health, 2006; 42:596–600.
49.
WysockiT, GrecoP. Social support and diabetes management in childhood and adolescence: Influence of parents and friends. Curr Diab Rep, 2006; 6:117–122.
50.
SchulzKF, AltmanDG, MoherD. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med, 2010; 8:18.
51.
CarverR. The case against statistical significance testing. Harv Educ Rev, 1978; 48:378–399.
52.
JacobsonNS, TruaxP. Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol, 1991; 59:12.
53.
JohnsonDH. The insignificance of statistical significance testing. J Wildl Manage, 1999:763–772.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
