Failure to Debrief after Critical Events in Anesthesia Is Associated with Failures in Communication during the Event

Implementation of a routine post-shift debriefing program in ICU aiming at quality-of-care improvement: A primary analysis of feasibility and impacts

OBJECTIVES

This report describes the implementation of a clinical debriefing (CD) program in intensive care units (ICU) and analyses its feasibility and its impact on staff well-being.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

From April to September 2023, post-shift CDs were run once a week in 2 out of 7 units in our department, using an adapted version of the DISCOVER-PHASE tool. CD sessions were performed face-to-face with volunteer members of the multidisciplinary ICU team.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

After 6 months, a survey assessing the satisfaction of the debriefed teams was conducted. The impact of CD on staff well-being was assessed using three validated questionnaires (Maslach Burnout Inventory, Ways of Coping Checklist, Professional Quality of Life Scale) administered in the 7 units before and after the CD period.

RESULTS

A total of 44 CDs were performed, lasting 15 (4-35) min. There were 6 (1-9) attendees per CD, mainly nurses (64.6%). Discussions focused mainly on basic problems related to dysfunctional material, communication and organization inside the team. The two debriefed teams were satisfied of the program and gave 9, 8 and 8 out of 10 on a visual analogical scale for the climate of confidence of the DC, their organisation, and their ability to improve working conditions and quality of care, respectively. Subscores at the three questionnaires assessing staff well-being before and after the CD period were similar, whether teams experienced CD or not.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing of post-shift debriefings in our ICU was feasible and well accepted. More prolonged programs are probably needed to demonstrate benefits on staff well-being.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

This report offers elements that other teams can use to successfully conduct post-shift debriefings and to plan future research on longer-term programs.

What and when to debrief: a scoping review examining interprofessional clinical debriefing

INTRODUCTION

Clinical debriefing (CD) improves teamwork and patient care. It is implemented across a range of clinical contexts, but delivery and structure are variable. Furthermore, terminology to describe CD is also inconsistent and often ambiguous. This variability and the lack of clear terminology obstructs understanding and normalisation in practice. This review seeks to examine the contextual factors relating to different CD approaches with the aim to differentiate them to align with the needs of different clinical contexts.

METHODS

Articles describing CD were extracted from Medline, CINAHL, ERIC, PubMed, PsychINFO and Academic Search Complete. Empirical studies describing CD that involved two or more professions were eligible for inclusion. Included papers were charted and analysed using the Who-What-When-Where-Why-How model to examine contextual factors which were then used to develop categories of CD. Factors relating to what prompted debriefing and when debriefing occurred were used to differentiate CD approaches.

RESULTS

Forty-six papers were identified. CD was identified as either prompted or routine, and within these overarching categories debriefing was further differentiated by the timing of the debrief. Prompted CD was either immediate or delayed and routine CD was postoperative or end of shift. Some contextual factors were unique to each category while others were relatively heterogeneous. These categories help clarify the alignment between the context and the intention of CD.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed categories offer a practical way to examine and discuss CD which may inform decisions about implementation. By differentiating CD according to relevant contextual factors, these categories may reduce confusion which currently hinders discourse and implementation. The findings from this review promote context-specific language and a shift away from conceptions of CD that embody a one-size-fits-all approach.

Nontechnical Skills for Intraoperative Team Members

Nontechnical skills, defined as the set of cognitive and social skills used by individuals and teams to reduce error and improve performance in complex systems, have become increasingly recognized as a key contributor to patient safety. Efforts to characterize, quantify, and teach nontechnical skills in the context of perioperative care continue to evolve. This review article summarizes the essential behaviors for safety, described in taxonomies for nontechnical skills assessments developed for intraoperative clinical team members (eg, surgeons, anesthesiologists, scrub practitioners, perfusionists). Furthermore, the authors describe emerging methods to advance understanding of the impact of nontechnical skills on perioperative outcomes.

Guidelines on human factors in critical situations 2023

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines to define the place of human factors in the management of critical situations in anaesthesia and critical care.

DESIGN

A committee of nineteen experts from the SFAR and GFHS learned societies was set up. A policy of declaration of links of interest was applied and respected throughout the guideline-producing process. Likewise, the committee did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product (drug or medical device). The committee followed the GRADE® method (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based.

METHODS

We aimed to formulate recommendations according to the GRADE® methodology for four different fields: 1/ communication, 2/ organisation, 3/ working environment and 4/ training. Each question was formulated according to the PICO format (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). The literature review and recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The experts' synthesis work and application of the GRADE® method resulted in 21 recommendations. Since the GRADE® method could not be applied in its entirety to all the questions, the guidelines used the SFAR "Recommendations for Professional Practice" A means of secured communication (RPP) format and the recommendations were formulated as expert opinions.

CONCLUSION

Based on strong agreement between experts, we were able to produce 21 recommendations to guide human factors in critical situations.

Evaluation of a Daily Nine-Item "Handbook for Self-Care at Work" for Palliative Care Clinicians

Context: A daily nine-item "Handbook for Self-Care at Work" was created to increase the well-being and satisfaction of the staff at the department of palliative care of a tertiary oncological center in the United States. Objectives: To evaluate the perceived usefulness of and adherence to the Handbook. Design, Setting and Participants: An anonymous survey was conducted among the palliative care staff asking for the frequency of utilization and the perception of usefulness of the Handbook. Additional data collected included demographics, satisfaction with professional life, frequency of burnout, and frequency of callousness toward people. We also compared the use and perception of the Handbook before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Of 52 palliative care clinicians, 39 (75%) completed the survey. Most participants were women and were <49 years. Most respondents (59%) found the Handbook useful or very useful. Offer help, ask for help, and hydration were perceived as the most useful items. The items most frequently achieved were movement, hydration, and eat light. The least useful perceived item was nap time, which was rarely achieved. During the COVID-19 pandemic, 32 (82%) respondents found the Handbook to be as/somewhat more/much more useful, and 29 (75%) were able to adhere to the items as/somewhat more/much more often than before. Conclusion: Most respondents found the Handbook useful and were able to accomplish the items most of the days. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the staff felt that the Handbook was more useful.

Practice of debriefing of critical events: a survey-based cross-sectional study of Portuguese anesthesiologists

Debriefing is an essential procedure for identifying medical errors, improving communication, reviewing team performance, and providing emotional support after a critical event. This study aimed to describe the current practice and limitations of debriefing and gauge opinions on the best timing, effectiveness, need for training, use of established format, and expected goals of debriefing among Portuguese anesthesiologists.

Methods

We performed a national cross-sectional online survey exploring the practice of anesthesiologists' debriefing practice after critical events in Portuguese hospitals. The questionnaire was distributed using a snowball sampling technique from July to September 2021. Data were descriptively and comparatively analyzed.

Results

We had replies from 186 anesthesiologists (11.3% of the Portuguese pool). Acute respiratory event was the most reported type of critical event (96%). Debriefing occurred rarely or never in 53% of cases, 59% of respondents needed more training in debriefing, and only 4% reported having specific tools in their institutions to carry it out. There was no statistical association between having a debriefing protocol and the occurrence of critical events (P=.474) or having trained personnel (P=.95). The existence of protocols was associated with lower frequencies of debriefing (P=.017).

Conclusions

Portuguese anesthesiologists know that debriefing is an essential process that increases patient safety, but among those surveyed, there is a need for an adequate debriefing culture or practice.

Trial registration

Research registry 7741 (https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home).

The resident experience with psychological safety during interprofessional critical event debriefings

OBJECTIVES

Interprofessional feedback and teamwork skills training are important in graduate medical education. Critical event debriefing is a unique interprofessional team training opportunity in the emergency department. While potentially educational, these varied, high-stakes events can threaten psychological safety for learners. This is a qualitative study of emergency medicine resident physicians' experience of interprofessional feedback during critical event debriefing to characterize factors that impact their psychological safety.

METHODS

The authors conduced semistructured interviews with resident physicians who were the physician team leader during a critical event debriefing. Interviews were coded and themes were generated using a general inductive approach and concepts from social ecological theory.

RESULTS

Eight residents were interviewed. The findings suggest that cultivating a safe learning environment for residents during debriefings involves the following: (1) allowing space for validating statements, (2) supporting strong interprofessional relationships, (3) providing structured opportunities for interprofessional learning, (4) encouraging attendings to model vulnerability, (5) standardizing the process of debriefing, (6) rejecting unprofessional behavior, and (7) creating the time and space for the process in the workplace.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the numerous intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional factors at play, educators should be sensitive to times when a resident cannot engage due to unaddressed threats to their psychological safety. Educators can address these threats in real time and over the course of a resident's training to enhance psychological safety and the potential educational impact of critical event debriefing.

[The operating room, at the center of the danger]

Cardiac anesthesiologists face a demanding and stressful practice that requires a sense of well-being at work that is essential to patient safety and quality of care. Like all cardiac caregivers, they are exposed to the death of the people they care for and must nevertheless overcome the difficulties associated with the management of heavy patients.

Education based on publicly-available keyword data is associated with decreased stress and improved trajectory of in-training exam performance

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the impact of data-driven didactic sessions on metrics including fund of knowledge, resident confidence in clinical topics, and stress in addition to American Board of Anesthesiology In-Training Examination (ITE) percentiles.

DESIGN

Observational mixed-methods study.

SETTING

Classroom, video-recorded e-learning.

SUBJECTS

Anesthesiology residents from two academic medical centers.

INTERVENTIONS

Residents were offered a data-driven didactic session, focused on lifelong learning regarding frequently asked/missed topics based on publicly-available data.

MEASUREMENTS

Residents were surveyed regarding their confidence on exam topics, organization of study plan, willingness to educate others, and stress levels. Residents at one institution were interviewed post-ITE. The level and trend in ITE percentiles were compared before and after the start of this initiative using segmented regression analysis.

RESULTS

Ninety-four residents participated in the survey. A comparison of pre-post responses showed an increased mean level of confidence (4.5 ± 1.6 vs. 6.2 ± 1.4; difference in means 95% CI:1.7[1.5,1.9]), sense of study organization (3.8 ± 1.6 vs. 6.7 ± 1.3;95% CI:2.8[2.5,3.1]), willingness to educate colleagues (4.0 ± 1.7 vs. 5.7 ± 1.9;95% CI:1.7[1.4,2.0]), and reduced stress levels (5.9 ± 1.9 vs. 5.2 ± 1.7;95% CI:-0.7[-1.0,-0.4]) (all p < 0.001). Thirty-one residents from one institution participated in the interviews. Interviews exhibited qualitative themes associated with increased fund of knowledge, accessibility of high-yield resources, and domains from the Kirkpatrick Classification of an educational intervention. In an assessment of 292 residents from 2012 to 2020 at one institution, there was a positive change in mean ITE percentile (adjusted intercept shift [95% CI] 11.0[3.6,18.5];p = 0.004) and trajectory over time after the introduction of data-driven didactics.

CONCLUSION

Data-driven didactics was associated with improved resident confidence, stress, and factors related to wellness. It was also associated with a change from a negative to positive trend in ITE percentiles over time. Future assessment of data-driven didactics and impact on resident outcomes are needed.

Critical event debriefing: a checklist for the aftermath

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Millions of perioperative crises (e.g. anaphylaxis, cardiac arrest) may occur annually. Critical event debriefing can offer benefits to the individual, team, and system, yet only a fraction of perioperative critical events are debriefed in real-time. This publication aims to review evidence-based best practices for proximal critical event debriefing.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence-based key processes to consider for proximal critical event debriefing can be summarized by the WATER mnemonic: Welfare check (assessing team members' emotional and physical wellbeing to continue providing care); Acute/short-term corrections (matters to be addressed before the next case); Team reactions and reflections (summarizing case; listening to team member reactions; plus/delta conversation); Education (lessons learned from the event and debriefing); Resource awareness and longer term needs [follow-up (e.g. safety/quality improvement report), local peer-support and employee assistance resources]. A cognitive aid to accompany this mnemonic is provided with the publication.

SUMMARY

There is growing literature on how to conduct proximal perioperative critical event debriefing. Evidence-based best practices, as well as a cognitive aid to apply them, may help bridge the gap between theory and clinical practice. In this era of increased attention to burnout and wellness, the consideration of interventions to improve the quality and frequency of critical event debriefing is paramount.

From the Frontlines: A Qualitative Study of Staff Experiences With Clinical Event Debriefing

OBJECTIVES

Clinical event debriefing (CED) can improve patient care and outcomes, but little is known about CED across inpatient settings, and participant experiences have not been well described. In this qualitative study, we sought to characterize and compare staff experiences with CED in 2 hospital units, with a goal of generating recommendations for a hospital-wide debriefing program.

METHODS

We conducted 32 semistructured interviews with clinical staff who attended a CED in the previous week. We explored experiences with CED, with a focus on barriers and facilitators. We used content analysis with constant comparative coding to understand priorities identified by participants. We used inductive reasoning to develop a set of CED practice recommendations to match participant priorities.

RESULTS

Three primary themes emerged related to CED barriers and facilitators. (1) Factors affecting attendance: most respondents voiced a need for frontline staff inclusion in CED, but they also cited competing clinical duties and scheduling conflicts as barriers. (2) Factors affecting participant engagement: respondents described factors that influence participant engagement in reflective discussion. They described that the CED leader must cultivate a psychologically safe environment in which participants feel empowered to speak up, free from judgment. (3) Factors affecting learning and systems improvement: respondents emphasized that the CED group should generate a plan for improvement with accountable stakeholders. Collectively, these priorities propose several recommendations for CED practice, including frontline staff inclusion.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we propose recommendations for CED that are derived from first-hand participant experiences. Future study will explore implementation of CED practice recommendations.

The PATH to patient safety

Communication is critical to safe patient care. In this issue of the British Journal of Anaesthesia, Jaulin and colleagues show that use of a Post-Anaesthesia Team Handover (PATH) checklist is associated with fewer hypoxaemia events in the PACU, reduced handover interruptions, and other important metrics related to improved communication. The PATH checklist provides a link within a broader chain of safety checklists and other interventions that comprise a perioperative chain of survival.

Second victim support structures in anaesthesia: a cross-sectional survey in Belgian anaesthesiologists

BACKGROUND

Anaesthesiologists are prone to patient safety situations after which second victim symptoms can occur. In international literature, a majority of these second victims indicated that they were emotionally affected in the aftermath of a patient safety incident (PSI) and received little institutional support after these events.

OBJECTIVE

To study the current second victim support structures in anaesthesia departments in Belgium.

METHODS

An observational cross-sectional survey. Belgian anaesthesiologists and anaesthesiologists in training were contacted through e-mail from May 27th until 15 July 2020.

RESULTS

In total, 456 participants completed the online survey. 73.7% (n = 336) of the participants encountered a PSI during the last year of their medical practice. 80.9% (n = 368) of respondents answered that they do discuss incidents with their colleagues. 18.0% (n = 82) discussed all incidents. 19.3% (n = 88) admitted that these incidents are never discussed in their department. 15.4% of participants (n = 70) experienced or thought that the culture is negative during these PSI discussions. 17.3% (n = 79) scored the culture neutral. Anaesthesiologists who encountered a PSI in the last years scored the support of their anaesthesia department a mean score of 1.59 (ranging from -10 to +10). A significant correlation (P < 0.05) was found between the culture during the morbidity and mortality meetings, the support after the incidents and the perceived quality of the anaesthesia department.

CONCLUSION

Of the participating anaesthesiologist in Belgium, 80.9% discussed some PSIs and 18.0% discussed all PSIs as a normal part of their staff functioning with an experienced positive or neutral culture during these meetings in 84.6%. Psychological safety within the anaesthesiology departments is globally good; however, it could and should be optimized. This optimization process warrants further investigations in the future.

"A debriefer must be neutral" and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to identify taken-for-granted beliefs and assumptions about use, costs, and facilitation of post-event debriefing. These myths prevent the ubiquitous uptake of post-event debriefing in clinical units, and therefore the identification of process, teamwork, and latent safety threats that lead to medical error. By naming these false barriers and assumptions, the authors believe that clinical event debriefing can be implemented more broadly.

METHODS

We interviewed an international sample of 37 clinicians, educators, scholars, researchers, and healthcare administrators from hospitals, universities, and healthcare organizations in Western Europe and the USA, who had a broad range of debriefing experience. We adopted a systemic-constructivist approach that aimed at exploring in-depth assumptions about debriefing beyond obvious constraints such as time and logistics and focused on interpersonal relationships within organizations. Using circular questions, we intended to uncover new and tacit knowledge about barriers and facilitators of regular clinical debriefings. All interviews were transcribed and analyzed following a comprehensive process of inductive open coding.

RESULTS

In total, 1508.62 min of interviews (25 h, 9 min, and 2 s) were analyzed, and 1591 answers were categorized. Many implicit debriefing theories reflected current scientific evidence, particularly with respect to debriefing value and topics, the complexity and difficulty of facilitation, the importance of structuring the debriefing and engaging in reflective practice to advance debriefing skills. We also identified four debriefing myths which may prevent post-event debriefing from being implemented in clinical units.

CONCLUSION

The debriefing myths include (1) debriefing only when disaster strikes, (2) debriefing is a luxury, (3) senior clinicians should determine debriefing content, and (4) debriefers must be neutral and nonjudgmental. These myths offer valuable insights into why current debriefing practices are ad hoc and not embedded into daily unit practices. They may help ignite a renewed momentum into the implementation of post-event debriefing in clinical settings.

Clinical debriefing: A concept analysis

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this paper is to enhance nursing and collaborative practice by presenting a concept analysis of clinical debriefing and introducing an operational definition.

BACKGROUND

Debriefing has taken many forms, using a variety of approaches. Variations and inconsistencies in clinical debriefing, and its related terms, still exist in the clinical setting.

DESIGN

Concept analysis.

METHODS

Walker and Avant's eight-step approach to concept analysis.

RESULTS

The defining attributes of clinical debriefing identified in this analysis are described as the five E's: educated/experienced facilitator, environment, education, evaluation and emotions. Antecedents identified in this analysis include the critical event, the desire or need to review such an event and the organizational awareness to execute clinical debriefs. The consequences of clinical debriefings are primarily advantageous and positively impact involved nurses, healthcare teams, patients and organizations. Empirical referents of clinical debriefing are complex and multifactorial. The productivity of a clinical debrief can be enhanced through a series of proposed questions. Together, the defining attributes, antecedents and consequences shape a proposed operational definition of clinical debriefing.

CONCLUSION

Clinical debriefing is a valuable tool within healthcare organizations. Debriefing can be a holistic, interprofessional, collaborative experience when all five defining attributes are present. Further investigation is required to standardise debriefing practices in clinical settings.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

A concept analysis on clinical debriefing promotes uniformity of debriefing practices, reflective practice among nurses and healthcare teams, and contributes to nursing science by creating a platform for the development of practice standards, research and theory development.

Implementation of the ‘TAKE STOCK’ Hot Debrief Tool in the ED: a quality improvement project

Hot debriefing (HoD) describes a structured team-based discussion which may be initiated following a significant event. Benefits may include improved teamwork, staff well-being and identification of learning opportunities. Existing literature indicates that while staff value HoD following significant events, it is infrequently undertaken in practice. Internationally, several frameworks for HoD have been developed, although none are widely adopted for use in the ED. A quality improvement project was conducted to introduce HoD into a single UK ED in North West England, between January and March 2019. Following stakeholder consultation, the 9-item ‘TAKE STOCK’ tool was developed. Implementation of the tool increased the number of HoD (0—2.2 HoD episodes/week). Findings from the first plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycle are presented, which revealed the key strengths and limitations of this model. Staff perceptions of the tool were evaluated using a self-administered short questionnaire designed by the authors. Satisfaction with TAKE STOCK was assessed using 10-point numerical scales. Across respondents (n−15), average satisfaction scores exceeded 9 out of 10 concerning patient care, staff self-care, decision-making, education, teamwork and identification of equipment issues. Implementation of HoD into the ED is feasible and viewed as beneficial by staff. Implementation toolkits for TAKE STOCK have been requested by 42 additional UK hospitals and ambulance trusts, demonstrating significant interest in its use. Research is now required to formally validate HoD frameworks for use in the ED, and assess whether HoD results in sustained improvements to staff and patient outcomes.

Association Between Hospital Debriefing Practices With Adherence to Resuscitation Process Measures and Outcomes for In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background Identifying actionable resuscitation practices that vary across hospitals could improve adherence to process measures or outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We sought to examine whether hospital debriefing frequency after IHCA varies across hospitals and whether hospitals which routinely perform debriefing have higher rates of process-of-care compliance or survival. Methods We conducted a nationwide survey of hospital resuscitation practices in April of 2018, which were then linked to data from the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation national registry for IHCA. Hospitals were categorized according to their reported frequency of debriefing immediately after IHCA; rarely (0%-20% of all IHCA cases), occasionally (21%-80%), and frequently (81%-100%). Hospital-level rates of timely defibrillation (≤2 minutes), epinephrine administration (≤5 minutes), survival to discharge, return of spontaneous circulation, and neurologically intact survival were comparted for patients with IHCA from 2015 to 2017. Results Overall, there were 193 hospitals comprising 44 477 IHCA events. Mean patient age was 65±16, 41% were females, and 68% were of White race. Across hospitals, 84 (43.5%) rarely performed debriefings immediately after an IHCA, 82 (42.5%) performed debriefing sessions occasionally, and 27 (14.0%) performed debriefing frequently. There was no association between higher reported debriefing frequency and hospital rates of timely defibrillation and epinephrine administration. Mean hospital rates of risk-standardized survival to discharge were similar across debriefing frequency groups (rarely 25.6%; occasionally 26.0%; frequently 25.2%, P=0.72), as were hospital rates of risk-adjusted return of spontaneous circulation (rarely 72.2%; occasionally 73.0%; frequently 70.0%, P=0.06) and neurologically intact survival (rarely 21.9%, occasionally 22.2%, frequently 21.1%, P=0.75). Conclusions In a large contemporary nationwide quality improvement registry, hospitals varied widely in how often they conducted debriefings immediately after IHCA. However, hospital debriefing frequency was not associated with better adherence to timely delivery of epinephrine or defibrillation or higher rates of IHCA survival.

Development and implementation of an end-of-shift clinical debriefing method for emergency departments during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Multiple guidelines recommend debriefing after clinical events in the emergency department (ED) to improve performance, but their implementation has been limited. We aimed to start a clinical debriefing program to identify opportunities to address teamwork and patient safety during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We reviewed existing literature on best-practice guidelines to answer key clinical debriefing program design questions. An end-of-shift huddle format for the debriefs allowed multiple cases of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 illness to be discussed in the same session, promoting situational awareness and team learning. A novel ED-based clinical debriefing tool was implemented and titled Debriefing In Situ COVID-19 to Encourage Reflection and Plus-Delta in Healthcare After Shifts End (DISCOVER-PHASE). A facilitator experienced in simulation debriefings would facilitate a short (10-25 min) discussion of the relevant cases by following a scripted series of stages for debriefing. Data on the number of debriefing opportunities, frequency of utilization of debriefing, debriefing location, and professional background of the facilitator were analyzed.

RESULTS

During the study period, the ED treated 3386 suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases, with 11 deaths and 77 ICU admissions. Of the 187 debriefing opportunities in the first 8-week period, 163 (87.2%) were performed. Of the 24 debriefings not performed, 21 (87.5%) of these were during the four first weeks (21/24; 87.5%). Clinical debriefings had a median duration of 10 min (IQR 7-13). They were mostly facilitated by a nurse (85.9%) and mainly performed remotely (89.8%).

CONCLUSION

Debriefing with DISCOVER-PHASE during the COVID-19 pandemic were performed often, were relatively brief, and were most often led remotely by a nurse facilitator. Future research should describe the clinical and organizational impact of this DISCOVER-PHASE.

Bolstering clinician resilience through an interprofessional, web-based nightly debriefing program for emergency departments during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has instigated significant changes for health care systems. With clinician burnout rising, efforts to promote clinician resilience are essential. Within this quality improvement project, an interprofessional debriefing program (Brigham Resilience in COVID-19-pandemic Emergency Forum-BRIEF) was developed within two emergency departments (EDs). An interprofessional group of ED providers led optional, nightly debriefings using a web-based portal to connect with ED clinicians for six weeks. In total, 81 interprofessional staff participated in nightly debriefings with a 47% attendance rate. On average, three participants attended the BRIEF nightly (range = 2-8) to discuss the challenges of social distancing, scarce resources, high acuity, clinician burnout and mental health. Participation increased as rates of COVID-19 positive patients rose. Debriefing leaders provided ED leadership with summaries of clinician experiences and suggestions for improvements. Feedback supported quality improvement initiatives within the ED and greater mental health support for staff. Clinicians and administrators provided positive feedback regarding the program's impact on clinician morale, and clinical processes that promoted the safety and quality of patient care. Optional debriefing with receptive departmental leadership may be a successful tool to support clinicians and hospitals during critical events.

Understanding Debriefing: A Qualitative Study of Event Reconstruction at an Academic Medical Center

PURPOSE

This qualitative study sought to characterize the role of debriefing after real critical events among anesthesia residents at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.

METHOD

From October 2016 to June 2017 and February to April 2018, the authors conducted 25 semistructured interviews with 24 anesthesia residents after they were involved in 25 unique critical events. Interviews focused on the experience of the event and the interactions that occurred thereafter. A codebook was generated through annotation, then used by 3 researchers in an iterative process to code interview transcripts. An explanatory model was developed using an abductive approach.

RESULTS

In the aftermath of events, residents underwent a multistage process by which the nature of critical events and the role of residents in them were continuously reconstructed. Debriefing-if it occurred-was 1 stage in this process, which also included stages of internal dialogue, event documentation, and lessons learned. Negotiated in each stage were residents' culpability, reputation, and the appropriateness of their affective response to events.

CONCLUSIONS

Debriefing is one of several stages of interaction that occur after a critical event; all stages play a role in shaping how the event is interpreted and remembered. Because of its dynamic role in constituting the nature of events and residents' role in them, debriefing can be a high-stakes interaction for residents, which can contribute to their reluctance to engage in it. The function and quality of debriefing can be assessed in more insightful fashion by understanding its relation to the other stages of event reconstruction.

Critical Event Debriefing in a Community Hospital

Introduction Medical error is currently the third major cause of death in the United States after cardiac disease and cancer^. A significant number of root cause analyses performed revealed that medical errors are mostly attributed to human errors and communication gaps. Debriefing has been identified as a major tool used in identifying medical errors, improving communication, reviewing team performance, and providing emotional support following a critical event. Despite being aware of the importance of debriefing, most healthcare providers fail to make use of this tool on a regular basis, and very few studies have been conducted in regard to the practice of debriefing. This study ascertains the frequency, current practice, and limitations of debriefing following critical events in a community hospital. Design/Methods This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted among attending physicians, physician assistants, residents, and nurses who work in high acuity areas located in the study location. Data on current debriefing practices were obtained and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results A total of 130 respondents participated in this study. Following a critical event in their department, 65 (50%) respondents reported little (<25% of the time) or no practice of debriefing and only 20 (15.4%) respondents reported frequent practice (>75% of the time). Debriefing was done more than once a week as reported by 35 (26.9%) of the respondents and was led by attending physicians 77 (59.2%). The debrief session sometimes occurred immediately following a critical event (46.9%). Although 118 (90%) of the respondents feel that there is a need to receive some training on debriefing, only 51 (39%) of the respondents have received some form of formal training on the practice of debriefing. Among the healthcare providers who had some form of debriefing in their practice, the few debrief sessions held were to discuss medical management, identify problems with systems/processes, and provide emotional support. Increased workload was identified by 92 (70.8%) respondents as the major limitations to the practice of debriefing. Most respondents support that debriefing should be done immediately after a critical event such as death of a patient (123 [94.6%]), trauma resuscitation (108 [83.1%]), cardiopulmonary arrest (122 [93.8%]), and multiple casualty/disasters (95 [73.1%]). Conclusions In order to reduce medical errors, hospitals and its management team must create an environment that will encourage all patient care workers to have a debriefing session following every critical event. This can be achieved by organizing formal training, creating a template/format for debriefing, and encouraging all hospital units to make this an integral part of their work process.

Clinical event debriefing: a review of approaches and objectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review explores four different approaches and clarifies objectives for debriefing after a clinical event in the emergency department. Psychological debriefing aims to prevent or reduce symptoms of traumatic stress and normalize recovery. Psychological first aid helps team members provide each other with pragmatic social support. Debriefing for simulation-based education promotes learning by team members. Quality improvement approaches and after action reviews focus on systems improvement.

RECENT FINDINGS

Qualitative studies have begun to explore interactions between clinical staff after a significant clinical event. Clearer descriptions and measurements of quality improvements and the effect of clinical event debriefing on patient outcomes are appearing. An increasing number of studies describe melded, scripted approaches to the hot debrief.

SUMMARY

Clinical staff have consistently indicated they value debriefing after a significant clinical event. Differing objectives from different approaches have translated into a wide variety of methods and a lack of clarity about relevant outcomes to measure. Recent descriptions of scripted approaches may clarify these objectives and pave the way for measuring relevant outcomes that demonstrate the effectiveness of and find the place for debriefing in the emergency department.