Abstract
Background: Best debriefing practices include debriefing by a competent facilitator in a safe environment using a structured framework (Decker et al., 2013). Yet, structured frameworks and evaluation of debriefing are lacking in nursing education (Fey, 2014; Waznonis, 2015). A large-scale mixed methods study was conducted to describe simulation debriefing practices (SDP) of faculty in accredited, traditional, baccalaureate in nursing degree (BSN) programs in the United States. The interview findings from the study are presented to enable the learner to use findings to lessen the gap between current SDP and the best practice standard for debriefing.
Method: The study design was qualitative description with an embedded quantitative strand, allowing for the supplemental survey data collection prior to the interviews (Creswell & Clark, 2011). Interview participants were a subset of survey respondents who facilitated debriefing during the 2013 to 2014 academic year. Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted using an interview guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and corrected for accuracy. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clark, 2006). Data were collected until saturation occurred.
Findings: Twenty-three faculty members participated in interviews. All participants were full time faculty, with an average of six years of simulation debriefing experience. Three themes emerged with sub-themes: (a) Having the students' best interest at heart, (b) Getting over the emotional hurdle, and (c) Intentional debriefing evolves into learning.
Conclusions: Gaps were found in faculty development, use of a structured framework, and evaluation. Research is warranted on use of video, post-debriefing assignments, co-facilitation, and debriefing effectiveness.
Sigma Membership
Unknown
Lead Author Affiliation
International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning (INACSL)
Type
Presentation
Format Type
Text-based Document
Study Design/Type
N/A
Research Approach
Qualitative Research
Keywords:
Clinical Simulation, Debriefing, Structured Framework
Recommended Citation
Waznonis, Annette, "Moving towards best simulation debriefing practices: The simulation debriefing study" (2016). General Submissions: Presenations (Oral and Poster). 103.
https://www.sigmarepository.org/gen_sub_presentations/2016/presentations/103
Conference Name
INACSL Conference
Conference Host
International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning
Conference Location
Grapevine, Texas, USA
Conference Year
2016
Rights Holder
All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.
All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.
All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.
Review Type
Abstract Review Only: Reviewed by Event Host
Acquisition
Proxy-submission
Moving towards best simulation debriefing practices: The simulation debriefing study
Grapevine, Texas, USA
Background: Best debriefing practices include debriefing by a competent facilitator in a safe environment using a structured framework (Decker et al., 2013). Yet, structured frameworks and evaluation of debriefing are lacking in nursing education (Fey, 2014; Waznonis, 2015). A large-scale mixed methods study was conducted to describe simulation debriefing practices (SDP) of faculty in accredited, traditional, baccalaureate in nursing degree (BSN) programs in the United States. The interview findings from the study are presented to enable the learner to use findings to lessen the gap between current SDP and the best practice standard for debriefing.
Method: The study design was qualitative description with an embedded quantitative strand, allowing for the supplemental survey data collection prior to the interviews (Creswell & Clark, 2011). Interview participants were a subset of survey respondents who facilitated debriefing during the 2013 to 2014 academic year. Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted using an interview guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and corrected for accuracy. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clark, 2006). Data were collected until saturation occurred.
Findings: Twenty-three faculty members participated in interviews. All participants were full time faculty, with an average of six years of simulation debriefing experience. Three themes emerged with sub-themes: (a) Having the students' best interest at heart, (b) Getting over the emotional hurdle, and (c) Intentional debriefing evolves into learning.
Conclusions: Gaps were found in faculty development, use of a structured framework, and evaluation. Research is warranted on use of video, post-debriefing assignments, co-facilitation, and debriefing effectiveness.