medigraphic.com
ISSN 2683-2348 (Digital)
Federación Latinoamericana de Simulación Clínica y Seguridad del Paciente

2025, Número 3

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Simulación Clínica 2025; 7 (3)


Prebriefing: evidencias de su implementación a diez años de la introducción del concepto

Rodríguez-Vera F, Canales-Vergara M, Villegas-Muñoz V, Parada-Uyarte JM

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 38
Paginas: 113-123
Archivo PDF: 530.14 Kb.


RESUMEN

Introducción: el prebriefing es una sesión previa a la simulación que establece el contexto y las instrucciones necesarias para cumplir los objetivos de aprendizaje. A pesar de su relevancia, existe falta de consenso en su definición y prácticas asociadas. Objetivos: analizar las prácticas vinculadas al prebriefing según el consenso Delphi y evaluar la calidad de las revisiones sistemáticas sobre el tema. Material y métodos: se siguió el protocolo PRISMA-ScR, revisando bases de datos como Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed y SciELO usando los términos “prebriefing” OR “prebriefing” AND “training, simulation”, entre febrero y abril de 2025. Se evaluó la calidad mediante el instrumento AMSTAR-2. Resultados: se encontraron 940 artículos, de los cuales se seleccionaron 12, tras depurar duplicados y artículos no relevantes. Se identificaron seis artículos de contenido relevante, con dos de alta calidad y cuatro de calidad críticamente baja según AMSTAR-2. Conclusiones: el concepto de prebriefing sigue siendo complejo, con una literatura limitada que dificulta el consenso sobre su definición y componentes. Esto subraya la necesidad de más investigaciones para clarificar su implementación.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Díaz-Guío DA, Cimadevilla-Calvo B. Educación basadaen simulación: debriefing, sus fundamentos, bondadesy dificultades. Revista Latinoamericana de SimulaciónClínica. 2019; 1 (2): 95-103.

  2. Sheykhmohammadi N, Atashpendar A, ZampunierisD. High-fidelity simulation pre-briefing with digitalquizzes: Using INACSL standards for improvingeffectiveness. In: Poquet O, Ortega-Arranz A, Viberg O,et al. Proceedings of the 16th international conferenceon computer supported education (CSEDU 2024).2024, pp. 412-419). SCITEPRESS – Science andTechnology Publications. Available in: https://doi.org/10.5220/0012682500003693

  3. McDermott DS. Seeking consensus on “Prebriefing”:Preparing students for simulation-based learning(Order No. 3734765). 2015. Available from ProQuestDissertations & Theses Global. (1734038151).

  4. Page-Cutrara K. Use of “Prebriefing” in nursingsimulation: a literature review. Journal of NursingEducation. 2013; 53 (3): 136-141.

  5. McDermott DS, Ludlow J, Horsley E, Meakim C.Healthcare simulation standards of best practice™.Prebriefing: preparation and briefing. ClinicalSimulation in Nursing. 2021; 58; 913. Available in:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2021.08.008

  6. Meakim C, Boese T, Decker S, et al. Standards ofbest practice: simulation standard I: Terminology[Supplemental material]. Clinical Simulation inNursing. 2013; 9: s3-s11.

  7. Rodgers BL. Concepts, analysis and the developmentof nursing knowledge: the evolutionary cycle. J AdvNurs. 1989; 14: 330-335.

  8. Waxman KT. The development of evidence-basedclinical simulation scenarios: Guidelines for nurseeducators. J Nurs Educ. 2010; 49 (1): 29-35.Available in: https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20090916-07

  9. Beverly JDB. Pre simulation strategies: Do they increasestudent learning, confidence, and/or simulationparticipation? Clinical Simulation in Nursingm. 2011;7 (6): e248. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2011.09.016

  10. Brewer EP. Successful techniques for using humanpatient simulation in nursing education. J NursScholarsh. 2011; 43 (3): 311-317. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2011.01405.x

  11. Miller KK, Riley W, Davis S, Hansen HE. In situsimulation: a method of experiential learning topromote safety and team behavior. J Perinat NeonatalNurs. 2008; 22 (2): 105-113.

  12. Blazeck A. Simulation anxiety syndrome: Presentationand treatment. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2011;7 (2): e57-e60. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2010.05.002.

  13. Rudolph JW, Raemer DB, Simon R. Establishing asafe container for learning in simulation: the role ofthe presimulation briefing. Simul Healthc. 2014; 9(6): 339-349. Available in: http://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000047

  14. Onda E. Situated cognition: Its relationship tosimulation in nursing education. Clinical Simulationin Nursing. 2012; 8: e1-e8. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2010.11.004

  15. McDermott DS. The “Prebriefing” Concept: A Delphistudy of CHSE experts. Clinical Simulation in Nursing.2016; 12 (6): 219-227. Available in: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2016.02.001

  16. Penn J, Voyce C, Nadeau JW, Crocker AF, RamirezMN, Smith SN. Optimizing interprofessional simulationwith intentional prebriefing and debriefing. Advancesin Medical Education and Practice. 2023; 14: 1273-1277.

  17. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA Extensionfor Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist andExplanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169 (7): 467-473.Available in: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850

  18. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA2020 statement: An updated guideline for reportingsystematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372: n71. Availablein: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

  19. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, et al. AMSTAR is areliable and valid measurement tool to assess themethodological quality of systematic reviews. J ClinEpidemiol. 2009; 62(10), 1013-1020. Available in:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009

  20. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a criticalappraisal tool for systematic reviews that includerandomised or non-randomised studies of healthcareinterventions, or both. BMJ. 2017; 358: j4008.

  21. Henrico K. Psychological safety during a large-scalesimulation-based learning event. Scholarship ofTeaching and Learning in the South. 2024; 8 (1):34-55. Available in: https://doi.org/10.36615/sotls.v8i1.340

  22. Barzegar M, Boushehri E, Amini M, et al. Whathappened to simulation-based education in outpatientsetting in the 21st century: a scoping review. J Adv MedEduc Prof. 2024; 12 (2): 69-78. Available in: https://doi.org/10.30476/JAMP.2023.100297.1885

  23. Das S, Ahmed SM, Murry LL, Garg R. Simcrafting: acomprehensive framework for scenario developmentfor simulation. Indian J Anaesth. 2024; 68 (1): 31-35.Available in: https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_1262_23

  24. Lackie K, Hayward K, Ayn C, et al. Creatingpsychological safety in interprofessional simulation forhealth professional learners: a scoping review of thebarriers and enablers. J Interprof Care. 2023; 37 (2):187-202. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2022.2052269

  25. Tong LK, Li YY, Au ML, Wang SC, Ng WI. Prebriefingfor high-fidelity simulation in nursing education:a meta-analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2022; 119:105609. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105609

  26. Tong LK, Li YY, Au ML, et al. High-fidelity simulationduration and learning outcomes among undergraduatenursing students: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Nurse Educ Today. 2022; 116: 105435. Available in:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105435

  27. Silva CCD, Natarelli TRP, Domingues NA, FonsecaLMM, Melo LL. “Prebriefing” in clinical simulationin nursing: scoping review. Rev Gaucha Enferm.2022; 43(spe): e20220067. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2018.20220067.en

  28. Filomeno L, Minciullo A. High-fidelity simulation forthe education of nursing students: a scoping reviewof the literature. Prof Inferm. 2021; 74 (2): 180-189.Available in: https://doi.org/10.7429/pi.2021.7423180

  29. Halamek LP, Cady RAH, Sterling MR. Using briefing,simulation and debriefing to improve human andsystem performance. Semin Perinatol. 2019; 43(8): 151178. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2019.08.007

  30. León-Castelao E, Maestre JM. “Prebriefing” ensimulación clínica: análisis del concepto y terminologíaen castellano. Educación Médica, Volumen. 2019; 20(4): 238-248. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edumed.2018.12.011

  31. Kolbe M, Grande B, Spahn DR. Briefing and debriefingduring simulation-based training and beyond: content,structure, attitude and setting. Best Pract Res ClinAnaesthesiol. 2015; 29 (1): 87-96. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpa.2015.01.002

  32. Kilpatrick K, Paquette L, Jabbour M, et al. Systematicreview of the characteristics of brief team interventionsto clarify roles and improve functioning in healthcareteams. PLoS One. 2020; 15 (6): e0234416. Availablein: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234416

  33. Groom JA, Henderson D, Sittner BJ. National Leaguefor Nursing-Jeffries Simulation Framework state ofthe science project: Simulation design characteristics.Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2014; 10 (7): 337-344.

  34. Meakim CH, Fey MK, Chmil JV, Mariani B, AlinierG. Standards of best practice: Simulation standardIX: simulation design. Clinical Simulation in Nursing.2015; 11 (6): 309-315. Available in: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.03.005

  35. Chamberlain J. “Prebriefing” in nursing simulation: aconcept analysis using Rodger’s methodology. ClinicalSimulation in Nursing. 2015; 11 (7): 318-322. Availablein: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.05.003

  36. The INASCL Board of Directors. Standard I:Terminology. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2011;7 (4S): s3-s7. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2011.05.005

  37. Page-Cutrara K. “Prebriefing” in nursing simulation: aconcept analysis. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2015;11 (7): 335-340. Available in: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.05.001

  38. El Hussein M, Harvey G, Kilfoil L. Pre-brief insimulation-based experiences: a scoping review ofthe literature. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2021;61: 86-95. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2021.08.003




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com