Advertisement

Comparison of Self-Debriefing Alone or in Combination With Group Debrief

Published:October 08, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2019.08.005

      Highlights

      • Self-debrief can be combined with an in-person group debrief.
      • Self-debrief plus group debrief can optimize learning.
      • Evidence-informed debriefing options are available for educators to consider.

      Abstract

      Background

      Self-debrief alone and in combination with group debrief methods has not been well explored. Self-debrief requires self-assessment and reflection by the learner where one's strengths and areas for growth are identified. These skills are critical to the development of reflexive practitioners.

      Method

      A mixed methods study was conducted to examine debriefing methods. Participants completed a prenatal virtual gaming simulation and then were randomly assigned by lab section to one of three debriefing methods: self-debrief, self-debrief and small-group debrief, self-debrief and large-group debrief. Data were collected regarding two outcomes: prenatal knowledge and the debriefing experience.

      Results

      All groups made significant knowledge gains. The self-debrief–only participants had the lowest debriefing experience scores. The small- and large-group debriefing after self-debriefing offered many benefits.

      Conclusion

      Self-debrief after a virtual simulation encourages reflection and self-awareness. Combining self-debrief with a small- or large-group debrief can optimize the learning experience.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Simulation In Nursing
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Abdullah M.Y.
        • Bakar N.R.A.
        • Mahbob M.H.
        Student’s participation in classroom: what motivates them to speak up?.
        Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 51: 516-522
        • Adamson K.
        A systematic review of the literature related to the NLN/Jeffries simulation framework.
        Nursing Education Perspectives. 2015; 36: 281-291https://doi.org/10.5480/15-1655
        • Al Sabei S.D.
        • Lasater K.
        Simulation debriefing for clinical judgment development: a concept analysis.
        Nurse Education Today. 2016; 45: 42-47https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.06.008
        • Andersen E.
        • Olsen L.
        • Denison J.
        • Zerin I.
        • Reekie M.
        “I will go if I don't have to talk”: nursing students' perceptions of reflective, debriefing discussions and intent to participate.
        Nurse Education Today. 2018; 70: 96-102https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.08.019
        • Bălan O.M.
        • Moldoveanu A.
        • Moldoveanu F.
        • Morara A.
        From game design to gamification and serious games-how game design principles apply to educational gaming.
        in: Conference proceedings of »eLearning and Software for Education« (eLSE) 01. 2016: 334-341
        • Boet S.
        • Bould M.D.
        • Bruppacher H.R.
        • Desjardins F.
        • Chandra D.B.
        • Naik V.N.
        Looking in the mirror: self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises.
        Critical Care Medicine. 2011; 39: 1377-1388https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e31820eb8be
        • DiBattista D.
        • Kurzawa L.
        Examination of the quality of multiple-choice items on classroom tests.
        The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2011; 2: 1-23https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2011.2.4
        • Duff E.
        • Miller L.
        • Bruce J.
        Online virtual simulation and diagnostic reasoning: a scoping review.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2016; 12: 377-384https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2016.04.001
        • Eppich W.
        • Cheng A.
        Promoting excellence and reflective learning in simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing.
        Simulation in Healthcare. 2015; 10: 106-115https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072
        • INACSL Standards Committee
        INACSL standards of best practice: Simulation Debriefing.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2016; 12: S21-S25https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2016.09.008
        • Irwin P.
        • Coutts R.
        A systematic review of the experience of using second life in the education of undergraduate nurses.
        Journal of Nursing Education. 2015; 54: 572-577https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20150916-05
        • Kardong-Edgren S.
        • Gore T.
        • Waxman K.T.
        • Willhaus J.K.
        Sharing student performance information in simulation: a debate.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2018; 17: 58-62https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2017.12.003
        • Kidd L.I.
        • Knisley S.J.
        • Morgan K.I.
        Effectiveness of a second life? Simulation as a teaching strategy for undergraduate mental health nursing students.
        Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services. 2012; 50: 28-37https://doi.org/10.3928/02793695-20120605-04
        • Kolb D.A.
        Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development.
        2nd ed. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ2015
        • Lapum J.
        • Verkuyl M.
        • Hughes M.
        • Romaniuk D.
        • McCulloch T.
        • Mastrilli P.
        Self- debriefing in virtual simulation.
        Nurse Educator. 2018; ([Epub ahead of print].): 1-3https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000639
        • Lestander Ö.
        • Lehto N.
        • Engström Å.
        Nursing students' perceptions of learning after high fidelity simulation: effects of a three-step post-simulation reflection model.
        Nurse Education Today. 2016; 40: 219-224https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.03.011
        • Miller E.T.
        • Farra S.
        • Simon A.
        Asynchronous online debriefing with health care workers: lessons learned.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2018; 20: 38-45https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2018.04.007
        • Oikawa S.
        • Berg B.
        • Turban J.
        • Vincent D.
        • Mandai Y.
        • Birkmire-Peters D.
        Self- debriefing vs instructor debriefing in a pre-internship simulation curriculum: night on call.
        Hawaii Journal of Medicine & Public Health. 2016; 75: 127-132
        • Partin J.L.
        • Payne T.A.
        • Slemmons M.F.
        Students' perceptions of their learning experiences using high-fidelity simulation to teach concepts relative to obstetrics.
        Nursing Education Perspectives. 2011; 32: 186-188https://doi.org/10.5480/1536-5026-32.3.186
        • Phillips B.N.
        • Turnbull B.J.
        • He F.X.
        Assessing readiness for self-directed learning within a non-traditional nursing cohort.
        Nurse Education Today. 2015; 35: e1-e7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2014.12.003
        • Reed S.J.
        • Andrews C.M.
        • Ravert P.
        Debriefing simulations: comparison of debriefing with video and debriefing alone.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2013; 9: e585-e591https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2013.05.007
        • Reed S.
        Debriefing experience scale: development of a tool to evaluate the student learning experience in debriefing.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2012; 8: e211-e217https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2011.11.002
        • Roh Y.S.
        • Jang K.I.
        Survey of factors influencing learner engagement with simulation debriefing among nursing students.
        Nursing Health Science. 2017; 19: 485-491https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12371
        • Schaffer M.
        • Tiffany J.
        • Kantack K.
        • Anderson L.
        Second life virtual learning in public health nursing.
        Journal of Nursing Education. 2016; 55: 536-540https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20160816-09
        • Sullivan N.
        • Swoboda S.M.
        • Breymier T.
        • Lucas L.
        • Sarasnick J.
        • Rutherford-Hemming T.
        • Kardong-Edgren S.
        Emerging evidence toward a 2:1 clinical to simulation ratio: a study comparing the traditional clinical and simulation settings.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2019; 30: 34-41https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2019.03.003
        • Tosterud R.
        • Hall-Lord M.L.
        • Petzäll K.
        • Hedelin B.
        Debriefing in simulation conducted in small and large groups - nursing students’ experiences.
        Journal of Nursing Education and Practice. 2014; 4: 173-182https://doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v4n9p173
        • Verkuyl M.
        • Hughes M.
        • Tsui J.
        • Betts L.
        • St-Amant O.
        • Lapum J.
        Virtual gaming simulation in nursing education: a focus group study.
        Journal of Nursing Education. 2017; 56: 274-280https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20170421-04
        • Verkuyl M.
        • Lapum J.L.
        • Hughes M.
        • McCulloch T.
        • Liu L.
        • Mastrilli P.
        • Betts L.
        Virtual gaming simulation: exploring self, virtual and in-person debriefing.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2018; 20: 7-14https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2018.04.006
        • Verkuyl M.
        • Atack L.
        • McCulloch T.
        • Lui L.
        • Betts L.
        • Lapum J.L.
        • Romaniuk D.
        Comparison of debriefing methods following a virtual simulation: an experiment.
        Journal of Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2018; 19: 1-7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2018.03.002
        • Waznonis A.R.
        Simulation debriefing practices in traditional baccalaureate nursing programs: national survey results.
        Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2015; 11: 110-119https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2014.10.002
        • Wisdom J.
        • Creswell J.W.
        Mixed Methods: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis While Studying Patient-Centered Medical Home Models.
        (AHRQ Publication No.13-0028-EF) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD2013
        • Zigmont J.
        • Kappus L.
        • Sudikoff S.
        The 3D model of debriefing: defusing, discovery, and deepening.
        Seminars in Perinatology. 2011; 35: 52-58https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2011.01.003