OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has become integral to critical care. Data informing optimal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education modalities are lacking. We aimed to compare the effect of high-fidelity simulation versus interactive mobile learning on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition and retention among clinicians. DESIGN: Observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A single academic medical center. SUBJECTS: Forty-four critical care clinicians with limited extracorporeal membrane oxygenation experience. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive: 1) simulation: three high-fidelity training scenarios, 2) QuizTime: 15 total multiple-choice questions delivered over 3 weeks via mobile device, or 3) experiential: no formal training. Participants completed a survey, written knowledge examination, and simulation assessment prior to randomization, immediately following the intervention, and 4 month postintervention. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was knowledge about extracorporeal membrane oxygenation assessed by score on the immediate postintervention written examination. Secondary outcomes included performance in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulation postintervention and 4 months later assessed by a rater blinded to group assignment. Clinicians randomized to simulation (n = 15), QuizTime (n = 14), and experiential (n = 15) had similar baseline characteristics. Adjusting for baseline knowledge, postintervention examination scores were higher in the simulation group (90.0%; interquartile range, 85.0-90.0%) than the QuizTime group (70.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.0003) and the experiential group (75.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.001). Scores did not differ between the groups at 4 months (p > 0.05 in all analyses). In postintervention extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulations, the simulation group demonstrated shorter time to critical action compared with QuizTime (80.0 s [interquartile range, 54.0-111.0 s] vs 300.0 s [interquartile range 85.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.02) and compared with both QuizTime (45.0 s [interquartile range, 34.0-92.5 s] vs 255.5 s [interquartile range, 102.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.008) and experiential (300.0 s [interquartile range, 58.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.009) at 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation was superior to QuizTime and experiential learning with regard to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition. Further studies are needed to ascertain the effect of these interventions on knowledge retention, clinical performance, and patient outcomes.