Evaluation of two different poverty simulations with professional phase pharmacy students

Pharmacy students will interact with patients who struggle to receive the health care they need. Since attitudes can influence behavior, exposure to these struggles may positively improve patient care. This study evaluates a group of student responses to two different interventions approximately 9 months apart. The primary objectives of this study were to: (1) identify if SPENT, an online game, could alone improve students' attitudes towards those living in poverty, (2) determine if changes imparted by SPENT were retained for nine months, and (3) identify if CAPS, a live simulation, has an additional benefit.

Student participants completed both the SPENT online game and the CAPS simulation. Students were asked to complete the Undergraduate Perceptions of Poverty Tracking Survey (UPPTS) before and after each simulation FINDINGS: Ninety-nine first year and second year professional phase pharmacy students completed both interventions and all surveys. The average pre-survey and post survey "scores" for the SPENT game were 133.52 and 135.54, a statistically significant improvement (p=0.046). When comparing the SPENT post "score" and the pre-survey score of CAPS (136.45) there was no significant difference (p=0.423). The average pre-survey and post survey "scores" for CAPS were 136.45 and 139.18, a statistically significant improvement (p=0.001). An analysis of the overall change showed a statistically significant improvement of 5.6667 (p<0.001).

Both the online SPENT game and CAPS live simulation interventions had positive effects on the students' empathy towards people living in poverty.