Evaluating facilitator adherence to a newly adopted simulation debriefing framework
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.77268Résumé
Background: Post-simulation debriefing is a critical component of the learning process for simulation based medical education, and multiple frameworks have been established in an attempt to maximize learning during debriefing through guided reflection. This study developed and applied a rubric to measure facilitator adherence to the newly adopted Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS) debriefing framework to evaluate the efficacy of current faculty development.
Methods: A retrospective review of 187 videos using a structured 13-behavior rubric based on the PEARLS debriefing model was conducted of facilitator-learner debriefings following a simulated clinical encounter for medical students. The aggregate results were used to describe common patterns of debriefing and focus future faculty development efforts.
Results: In total, 187 debriefings facilitated by 32 different facilitators were analyzed. Average scores for each of the 13 PEARLS framework behaviors ranged from 0.04 to 0.971. Seven items had an average of ≥ 0.77, ten averaged > 0.60 and two averaged < 0.20.
Conclusions: Faculty adhered to some behaviors elicited by the PEARLS model more consistently than others. These results suggest that faculty facilitators are more likely to adhere to frameworks that focus on educational behaviors and less likely to adhere to organizational or methodological frameworks.
Références
Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, Glick S. Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Acad Med 2003;78(8):783-8 https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200308000-00006
Gaba DM. The future vision of simulation in healthcare. Simul Healthc 2007;2(2):126-35 https://doi.org/10.1136/qhc.13.suppl_1.i2
Agha S. Effect of simulation based education for learning in medical students: a mixed study method. J Pak Med Assoc 2019;69(4):545-54 PMID: 31000861
Palaganas JC, Fey M, Simon R. Structured debriefing in simulation-based education. AACN Adv Crit Care 2016;27(1):78-85/ https://doi.org/10.4037/aacnacc2016328
Ryoo EN, Ha EH. The importance of debriefing in simulation-based learning: comparison between debriefing and no debriefing. Comput Inform Nurs 2015;33(12):538-45 https://doi.org/10.1097/cin.0000000000000194
Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-Fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A. More than one way to debrief: a critical review of healthcare simulation debriefing methods. Simul Healthc 2016;11(3):209-17. https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000148
Dufrene C, Young A. Successful debriefing - best methods to achieve positive learning outcomes: a literature review. Nurse Educ Today 2014;34(3):372-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.026.
Barry Issenberg S, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10-28 https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500046924.
Shirani Bidabadi N, Nasr Isfahani A, Rouhollahi A, Khalili R. Effective Teaching Methods in Higher Education: Requirements and Barriers. J Adv Med Educ Prof 2016;4(4):170-78 PMID: 27795967
Owens MT, Trujillo G, Seidel SB, et al. Collectively improving our teaching: attempting biology department-wide professional development in scientific teaching. CBE life Sci Educ 2018;17(1):ar2 https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-06-0106.
Reierson IA, Haukedal TA, Hedeman H, Bjork IT. Structured debriefing: what difference does it make? Nurse Educ Pract 2017;25:104-10 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2017.04.013.
Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simul Healthc 2015;10(2):106-15 https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072.
Steinert Y, Mann K, Centeno A, Dolmans D, Spencer J, Gelula M, Prideaux D. A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness in medical education: BEME Guide No. 8. Med Teach 2009;28(6):497-526: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590600902976
Abulebda K, Srinivasan S, Maa T, Stormorken A, Chumpitazi C. Development, implementation, and evaluation of a faculty development workshop to enhance debriefing skills among novice facilitators. Cureus 2020: 10;12(2) https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.6942
Cheng A, Vincent G, Dieckmann P, Sonal A, Robinson T, Eppich W. Faculty development for simulation programs: five issues for the future of debriefing training. Simul Healthc 2015: 10(4): 217-22 https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000090
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
© Lucas Smith, AJ Kleinheksel, Matthew Tews 2023
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
La soumission d’un manuscrit original à la revue constitue une indication qu’il s’agit d’un travail original, qu’il n’a jamais été publié et qu’il n’est pas envisagé pour publication dans une autre revue. S’il est accepté, il sera publié en ligne et ne pourra l’être ailleurs sous la même forme, à des fins commerciales, dans quelque langue que ce soit, sans l’accord de l’éditeur.
La publication d’une recherche scientifique a pour but la diffusion de connaissances et, sous un régime sans but lucratif, ne profite financièrement ni à l’éditeur ni à l’auteur.
Les auteurs qui publient dans la Revue canadienne d’éducation médicale acceptent de publier leurs articles sous la licence Creative Commons Paternité - Pas d’utilisation commerciale, Pas de modification 4.0 Canada. Cette licence permet à quiconque de télécharger et de partager l’article à des fins non commerciales, à condition d’en attribuer le crédit aux auteurs. Pour plus de détails sur les droits que les auteurs accordent aux utilisateurs de leur travail, veuillez consulter le résumé de la licence et la licence complète.
