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

2022, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Simulación Clínica 2022; 4 (2)

Elements, benefits and challenges of co-debriefing for clinical simulation: an integrative review

Silva GJ, Silva GD, Gonçalves-do NK, Del AN, Merizio MFT, Hetzel-Campbell S, Barcellos-Dalri MC

Language: Spanish
References: 24
Page: 59-66
PDF size: 295.96 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: co-debriefing is characterized by the implementation of discussion/reflection in clinical simulation by more than one facilitator/instructor, considered useful to associate perspectives and knowledge of different professionals during the debriefing; however, it is still little explored in the scientific literature. Objectives: synthesize the scientific evidence available in the literature on the necessary components to plan and execute co-debriefing in clinical simulation in health. Material and methods: integrative bibliographic review carried out in PubMed®, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS), Web of Science, EMBASE and Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC). The Rayyan application was used for selection and thematic analysis. Results: a total of 616 studies were identified and five were selected. Three categories were highlighted: (1) the components of co-debriefing (definition, objectives, types of co-debriefing, structure and procedure), (2) benefits (potentialization of knowledge and resolution of conflicts), (3) and challenges (misalignment between enablers and costs to maintain human resources). Conclusions: understanding the five main components that make up the co-debriefing technique supports its planning and correct execution.


REFERENCES

  1. Cheng A, Palangas J, Eppich W, Rudolph J, Robinson T, Grant V. Co-debriefing for simulation-based education: a primer for facilitators. Simul Healthc. 2015; 10: 69-75.

  2. Bullard MJ, Fox SM, Wares CM, Heffner AC, Stephens C, Rossi L. Simulation-based interdisciplinar education improves intern atitudes and outlook towards colleagues in other disciplines. BMC Medical Educ. 2019; 19: 276.

  3. Bortolato-Major C, MantovaniII MF, Felix JV, Boostel R, Silva AT, Caravaca-Morera J. A. Avaliacao do debriefing na simulacao clínica em enfermagem: um estudo transversal. Rev Bras Enferm. 2019; 72: 825-831.

  4. Brown DK, Wong AH, Ahmed RA. Evaluation of simulation debriefing methods with interprofessional learning. J Interprof Care. 2018; 19: 1-3.

  5. Mendes KD, Silveira RC, Galvao CM. Revisao Integrativa: método de pesquisa para a incorporacao de evidencias na saúde e na enfermagem. Texto Contexto-Enferm. 2008; 17 (4): 758-764.

  6. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6: e1000097.

  7. Santos CM, Pimenta CA, Nobre MR. The pico strategy for the research question construction and evidence search. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2007; 15: 508-511.

  8. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews. 2016; 5: 210.

  9. Ursi ES, Galvao CM. Prevencao de lesoes de pele no perioperatório: revisao integrativa da literatura. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2006; 14: 124-131.

  10. Melnyk BM, Fineout-Overholt E. Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: a guide to best practice. 2. ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Pippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.

  11. Minayo MC. Sampling and saturation in qualitative research: consensuses and controversies. Rev Pesqui Qual. 2017; 5: 1-12.

  12. Krogh K, Bearman M, Nestel D. "Thinking on you feet" – a qualitative study of debriefing practice. Adv Simul. 2016; 1: 1-11.

  13. Maestre JM, Rojo E, Piedra L, Moral I, Simon R. El experto en contenidos como instructor colaborador en el debriefing. Simulación Clínica. 2019; 1: 37-44.

  14. Greiff JL, Brickerb MG, Gamaghelyan P, Tadevosyan M, Dengb S. Debriefing in peacemaking and conflict resolution practice: models of emergent learning and practitioner support. Reflective Pract. 2015; 16: 254-268.

  15. Kim SS, Gagne JC. Instructor-led vs. peer-led debriefing in preoperative care simulation using standardized patients. Nurse Educ Today. 2018; 71: 34-39.

  16. Szulewski A, Braund H, Egan R, Hall AK, Dagnone JD, Gegenfurtner A, et al. Through the learner's lens: eye-tracking augmented debriefing in medical simulation. J Grad Med Educ. 2018; 10: 340-341.

  17. Elhart MA, Dotson J, Smart D. Psychological debriefing of hospital emergency personnel: review of critical incident stress debriefing. IJNS. 2019; 6: 2-17.

  18. Dreifuerst KT. Getting started with debriefing for meaningful learning. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2015; 11: 268-275.

  19. Palaganas JC, Fey M, Simon R. Structured Debriefing in Simulation-Based Education. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2016; 27: 78-85.

  20. Coppens I, Verhaeghe S, Van Hecke A, Beeckman D. The effectiveness of crisis resource management and team debriefing in resuscitation education of nursing students: a randomised controlled trial. J Clin Nurs. 2018; 27: 77-85.

  21. Gantt LT, Overton S, Avery J, Swanson M. Comparison of debriefing methods and learning outcomes in human patient simulation. Clin Simul Nurs. 2018; 17: 7-13.

  22. Leonello VM, Leite MM, Almeida DM, Dias CA. Simulacao como estratégia para o ensino de administracao em enfermagem. Rev Grad USP. 2017; 2: 157-159.

  23. Melo BC, Falbo AR, Bezerra PG, Katz L. Perspectives on the use of instructional design guidelines for health simulation: a literature review. Sci Med. 2018; 28: 1-11.

  24. Schweller M, Ribeiro DL, Passeri SR, Wanderley JS, Carvalho-Filho M. Simulated medical consultation with standardized patients: in-depth debriefing based on dealing with emotions. Rev Bras Educ Med. 2018; 42: 82-91.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com