1
|
Howard R. Implementing debriefing after cardiac arrest: benefits and challenges. Nurs Stand 2024; 39:34-38. [PMID: 38946428 DOI: 10.7748/ns.2024.e12273] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/18/2024] [Indexed: 07/02/2024]
Abstract
Healthcare professionals, including nurses, will be involved in the care and management of patients in cardiac arrest. This highly stressful and demanding situation can lead to breakdowns in communication, difficulty in decision-making and emotional distress for members of the healthcare team. Debriefing is a recommended tool that team members can use to acknowledge what went well, what could be improved and areas for learning or development. However, debriefing is often not prioritised due to pressures in clinical practice. This article discusses the benefits of debriefing and outlines some of the approaches and tools that may be used. The author argues that by recognising the importance of debriefing after cardiac arrests in the hospital setting and committing to best practices, nurses can be better prepared for the challenges of resuscitation and improve patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Howard
- Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, England
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Paxino J, Szabo RA, Marshall S, Story D, Molloy E. What and when to debrief: a scoping review examining interprofessional clinical debriefing. BMJ Qual Saf 2024; 33:314-327. [PMID: 38160060 DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2023] [Accepted: 12/08/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Paxino
- Department of Medical Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rebecca A Szabo
- Department of Medical Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Stuart Marshall
- Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - David Story
- Department of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Elizabeth Molloy
- Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lopina N. A Staged Defragmented Simultaneous Debriefing Model As Integrated Micro-debriefing Components Inside Online Simulation for Competencies Formation. Cureus 2024; 16:e56000. [PMID: 38606236 PMCID: PMC11007450 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.56000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/09/2024] [Indexed: 04/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Currently, there are no separate debriefing models for online simulation training, and existing models simply imitate the traditional models used in on-site simulation training (the physical presence of individuals, such as students or trainees, in a simulation center). This involves hands-on, in-person training within a simulated environment to enhance practical skills and knowledge in a controlled setting. This scenario does not fully meet the requirements and capabilities of distance learning. Objective To develop a staged defragmented debriefing model as integrated micro-debriefing components inside an online simulation to support the development of clinical decision-making and competencies formation within medical education and offer recommendations to support the use of this debriefing model as a teaching strategy. Methods This descriptive study was conducted from August 2020 to September 2023. To build a staged defragmented debriefing model as integrated micro-debriefing components inside an online simulation for competencies formation the traditional debriefing model's components for on-site simulation training, simulation type, and structure, modern concepts of e-learning, and classification of the seriousness of medication errors were used. The main focus of this study was on providing a detailed account of the debriefing components for online simulation training, features, and implementation of this new teaching model. A total of 38 participants, healthcare professionals, were recruited for this study. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups: one experiencing the staged defragmented debriefing model (n = 20) and the other control group, which received traditional debriefing following simulation training (n = 18). Results The results allowed us to successfully develop a staged defragmented debriefing model inside the simulation that integrates micro-debriefing components located at different points of the simulation scenarios. This teaching approach was successfully implemented in online clinical case scenarios in the "ClinCaseQuest" Simulation Training Platform for continuous medical education. Additionally, an internal validation experiment comparing the effectiveness of the staged defragmented debriefing model with the traditional debriefing method demonstrated superior learning outcomes and participant satisfaction in the staged debriefing group. Conclusions The staged defragmented debriefing model, when integrated into online simulations, represents a promising strategy for advancing clinical decision-making skills and competencies formation in medical education. Implementation of this debriefing model as a teaching strategy holds promise for enhancing learning outcomes in medical education settings. Further research, validation, and implementation are recommended to maximize the model's potential impact on medical education and training.
Collapse
|
4
|
Duff JP, Morse KJ, Seelandt J, Gross IT, Lydston M, Sargeant J, Dieckmann P, Allen JA, Rudolph JW, Kolbe M. Debriefing Methods for Simulation in Healthcare: A Systematic Review. Simul Healthc 2024; 19:S112-S121. [PMID: 38240623 DOI: 10.1097/sih.0000000000000765] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Debriefing is a critical component in most simulation experiences. With the growing number of debriefing concepts, approaches, and tools, we need to understand how to debrief most effectively because there is little empiric evidence to guide us in their use. This systematic review explores the current literature on debriefing in healthcare simulation education to understand the evidence behind practice and clarify gaps in the literature. The PICO question for this review was defined as "In healthcare providers [P], does the use of one debriefing or feedback intervention [I], compared to a different debriefing or feedback intervention [C], improve educational and clinical outcomes [O] in simulation-based education?" We included 70 studies in our final review and found that our current debriefing strategies, frameworks, and techniques are not based on robust empirical evidence. Based on this, we highlight future research needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan P Duff
- From the Department of Pediatrics (J.P.D.), University of Alberta. Edmonton, Canada; College of Nursing and Health Professions (K.J.M.), Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA; Simulation Centre (J.S., M.K.), University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Pediatrics, Section of Emergency Medicine (I.T.G.), Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Treadwell Virtual Library (M.L.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Faculty of Medicine (J.S.), Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada; Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES) (P.D.), Herlev, Denmark; Department of Quality and Health Technology (P.D.), University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway; Department of Public Health (P.D.), University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Family and Preventive Medicine (J.A.A.), University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Center for Medical Simulation (J.W.R.), Boston, MA; and ETH Zurich (M.K.), Zurich, Switzerland
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wilson C, Janes G, Lawton R, Benn J. Types and effects of feedback for emergency ambulance staff: a systematic mixed studies review and meta-analysis. BMJ Qual Saf 2023; 32:573-588. [PMID: 37028937 PMCID: PMC10512001 DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2022-015634] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2022] [Accepted: 03/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Extensive research has been conducted into the effects of feedback interventions within many areas of healthcare, but prehospital emergency care has been relatively neglected. Exploratory work suggests that enhancing feedback and follow-up to emergency medical service (EMS) staff might provide staff with closure and improve clinical performance. Our aim was to summarise the literature on the types of feedback received by EMS professionals and its effects on the quality and safety of patient care, staff well-being and professional development. METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis, including primary research studies of any method published in peer-reviewed journals. Studies were included if they contained information on systematic feedback to emergency ambulance staff regarding their performance. Databases searched from inception were MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL and Web of Science, with searches last updated on 2 August 2022. Study quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data analysis followed a convergent integrated design involving simultaneous narrative synthesis and random effects multilevel meta-analyses. RESULTS The search strategy yielded 3183 articles, with 48 studies meeting inclusion criteria after title/abstract screening and full-text review. Interventions were categorised as audit and feedback (n=31), peer-to-peer feedback (n=3), postevent debriefing (n=2), incident-prompted feedback (n=1), patient outcome feedback (n=1) or a combination thereof (n=4). Feedback was found to have a moderate positive effect on quality of care and professional development with a pooled effect of d=0.50 (95% CI 0.34, 0.67). Feedback to EMS professionals had large effects in improving documentation (d=0.73 (0.00, 1.45)) and protocol adherence (d=0.68 (0.12, 1.24)), as well as small effects in enhancing cardiac arrest performance (d=0.46 (0.06, 0.86)), clinical decision-making (d=0.47 (0.23, 0.72)), ambulance times (d=0.43 (0.12, 0.74)) and survival rates (d=0.22 (0.11, 0.33)). The between-study heterogeneity variance was estimated at σ2=0.32 (95% CI 0.22, 0.50), with an I2 value of 99% (95% CI 98%, 99%), indicating substantial statistical heterogeneity. CONCLUSION This review demonstrated that the evidence base currently does not support a clear single point estimate of the pooled effect of feedback to EMS staff as a single intervention type due to study heterogeneity. Further research is needed to provide guidance and frameworks supporting better design and evaluation of feedback interventions within EMS. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42020162600.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin Wilson
- School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Research and Development Department, Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Wakefield, UK
- Yorkshire Quality and Safety Research Group, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford, UK
| | - Gillian Janes
- Department of Nursing, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
| | - Rebecca Lawton
- School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Yorkshire Quality and Safety Research Group, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford, UK
| | - Jonathan Benn
- School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Yorkshire Quality and Safety Research Group, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kolbe M, Goldhahn J, Useini M, Grande B. "Asking for help is a strength"-how to promote undergraduate medical students' teamwork through simulation training and interprofessional faculty. Front Psychol 2023; 14:1214091. [PMID: 37701867 PMCID: PMC10494543 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1214091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2023] [Accepted: 08/01/2023] [Indexed: 09/14/2023] Open
Abstract
The ability to team up and safely work in any kind of healthcare team is a critical asset and should be taught early on in medical education. Medical students should be given the chance to "walk the talk" of teamwork by training and reflecting in teams. Our goal was to design, implement and evaluate the feasibility of a simulation-based teamwork training (TeamSIM) for undergraduate medical students that puts generic teamwork skills centerstage. We designed TeamSIM to include 12 learning objectives. For this pre-post, mixed-methods feasibility study, third-year medical students, organized in teams of 11-12 students, participated and observed each other in eight simulations of different clinical situation with varying degrees of complexity (e.g., deteriorating patient in ward; trauma; resuscitation). Guided by an interprofessional clinical faculty with simulation-based instructor training, student teams reflected on their shared experience in structured team debriefings. Using published instruments, we measured (a) students' reactions to TeamSIM and their perceptions of psychological safety via self-report, (b) their ongoing reflections via experience sampling, and (c) their teamwork skills via behavior observation. Ninety four students participated. They reported positive reactions to TeamSIM (M = 5.23, SD = 0.5). Their mean initial reported level of psychological safety was M = 3.8 (SD = 0.4) which rose to M = 4.3 (SD = 0.5) toward the end of the course [T(21) = -2.8, 95% CI -0.78 to-0.12, p = 0.011 (two-tailed)]. We obtained n = 314 headline reflections from the students and n = 95 from the faculty. For the students, the most frequent theme assigned to their headlines involved the concepts taught in the course such as "10 s for 10 min." For the faculty, the most frequent theme assigned to their headlines were reflections on how their simulation session worked for the students. The faculty rated students' teamwork skills higher after the last compared to the first debriefing. Undergraduate medical students can learn crucial teamwork skills in simulations supported by an experienced faculty and with a high degree of psychological safety. Both students and faculty appreciate the learning possibilities of simulation. At the same time, this learning can be challenging, intense and overwhelming. It takes a team to teach teamwork.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michaela Kolbe
- Simulation Centre, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Management, Technology, and Economics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jörg Goldhahn
- Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Mirdita Useini
- Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Bastian Grande
- Simulation Centre, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Institute of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
McCarthy SE, Hogan C, Jenkins L, Schwanberg L, Williams DJ, Mellon L, Walsh A, Keane T, Rafter N. Videos of simulated after action reviews: a training resource to support social and inclusive learning from patient safety events. BMJ Open Qual 2023; 12:e002270. [PMID: 37553274 PMCID: PMC10414102 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Accepted: 06/30/2023] [Indexed: 08/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Innovation in the education and training of healthcare staff is required to support complementary approaches to learning from patient safety and everyday events in healthcare. Debriefing is a commonly used learning tool in healthcare education but not in clinical practice. Little is known about how to implement debriefing as an approach to safety learning across a health system. After action review (AAR) is a debriefing approach designed to help groups come to a shared mental model about what happened, why it happened and to identify learning and improvement. This paper describes a digital-based implementation strategy adapted to the Irish healthcare system to promote AAR uptake. The digital strategy aims to assist implementation of national level incident management policies and was collaboratively developed by the RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences and the National Quality and Patient Safety Directorate of the Health Service Executive. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a well-established in-person AAR training programme was disrupted and this led to the development of a series of open access videos on AAR facilitation skills (which accompany the online version of this paper). These provide: (1) an introduction to the AAR facilitation process; (2) a simulation of a facilitated formal AAR; (3) techniques for handling challenging situations that may arise in an AAR and a (4) reflection on the benefits of the AAR process. These have the potential to be used widely to support learning from patient safety and everyday events including excellent care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siobhán E McCarthy
- Graduate School of Healthcare Management, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Catherine Hogan
- National Quality and Patient Safety Directorate, Office of the Chief Clinical Officer, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Loretta Jenkins
- National Quality and Patient Safety Directorate, Office of the Chief Clinical Officer, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Lorraine Schwanberg
- National Quality and Patient Safety Directorate, Office of the Chief Clinical Officer, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland
| | - David J Williams
- Department of Geriatric and Stroke Medicine, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Lisa Mellon
- Department of Health Psychology, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Aisling Walsh
- Department of Public Health & Epidemiology, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Theresa Keane
- Graduate School of Healthcare Management, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Natasha Rafter
- Department of Public Health & Epidemiology, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|