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

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.

Reducing physical restraints in pediatrics: A quality improvement mixed-methods analysis of implementing a clinical debriefing process after behavioural health emergencies in a Children's Hospital

INTRODUCTION

An increasing number of pediatric patients with mental and behavioral health (MBH) conditions present to Emergency Department (ED) and inpatient settings with behavioral events that require physical restraint (PR). PR usage is associated with adverse outcomes. Clinical debriefing (CD) programs have been associated with improved performance but have not been studied in this population. After implementing an MBH-CD program in our Children's Hospital, we aimed to decrease the baseline (7/2018-3/2021) rate of a second PR episode (2PR) by 50 % in the ED and inpatient settings over two years.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team implemented an MBH-CD process in April 2021 for hospital teams to use immediately after behavioral events. We included patients ≤18 years old, with an ED or inpatient discharge MBH diagnosis, between July 2018 and June 2023. Pre- and post-implementation secondary outcomes included the ED median duration of PR and the ED PR time per 1000 h of ED care. ED and inpatient mean length of stay (LOS) and mean monthly visits (MMV) in pre- and post-implementation were also compared. Qualitative analysis identified major themes.

RESULTS

Post-implementation, the ED significantly decreased 2PR rate by 67 %; in inpatients, no significant change was demonstrated. Median duration of ED PR decreased from 112 to 71 min (p = 0.006) and ED PR time significantly decreased by 82 % (14.8 to 2.7 h per 1000 h). In the post-implementation period, mean LOS (ED and inpatient) and MMV (ED only) were significantly higher. Fifty-one percent of 494 behavioral alerts were debriefed. Median debriefing duration was 6 min (IQR 4,10). Common themes included cooperation and coordination (23 %) and clinical standards (14 %).

DISCUSSION

Clinical debriefing implementation was associated with significant improvement in ED patient outcomes. Inpatient outcomes were unchanged, but debriefings in both settings should enable frontline teams to continuously identify opportunities to improve future outcomes.