Evaluación y satisfacción del debriefing facilitado por un instructor frente al facilitado por iguales

  1. Cristina Calle-Domínguez 1
  2. César Cardenete-Reyes 2
  3. Diana Martín-Reyes 3
  4. Pilar González Sanz 4
  1. 1 Doctoranda. Universidad Europea de Madrid. Servicio de Emergencias Extrahospitalarias SUMMA 112. Madrid (España)
  2. 2 Doctor. Servicio de Emergencias Extrahospitalarias SUMMA 112. Madrid (España)
  3. 3 Doctora. Servicio de Emergencias Extrahospitalarias SAMUR-PC. Madrid (España)
  4. 4 Doctora. Departamento de Enfermería y Nutrición. Universidad Europea de Madrid. Villaviciosa de Odón, Madrid (España)
Mostrar afiliaciones +
Revista:
Metas de enfermería

ISSN: 1138-7262

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 25

Número: 6

Páginas: 15-23

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.35667/METASENF.2022.25.1003081957 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Metas de enfermería

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

Objective: to compare the assessment and satisfaction by participants for the debriefing provided by peers vs. the one conducted by instructors in a high fidelity clinical simulation at a post-graduate Nursing course on Out-of-Hospital Emergencies. Method: a quasi-experimental study conducted in 2019 at the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (Madrid). The population consisted in nurses who had been enrolled for the first time. They were assigned to a control arm (debriefing provided by experienced instructors – CA) or an intervention arm (provided by peers who received a 2-hour training on debriefing – IA). After each simulation (four in total) debriefings were assessed through the EDSS© questionnaire (29 items from 1 to 7 scores), and satisfaction (from 1 to 7 scores). Descriptive statistics was conducted as well as comparison for the overall results of the four sessions in both arms. Results: all the 30 persons enrolled participated in the study. The evaluation with the EDSS© questionnaire was similar in both arms, except in the ability of the facilitator to establish a stimulating learning environment (CA = 6.61; IA = 6.23; p= 0.019) and in the level of knowledge of the facilitator and how they used it to help the participants to improve their future performance (CA = 6.74; IA = 6.33; p= 0.003). Overall satisfaction was similar in both arms (CA = 6.63; IA = 6.55; p= 0.374). Conclusions: debriefing facilitated by a peer represents an alternative to traditional debriefing in post-graduate nurse training, based on the evaluation results of participants and their satisfaction; however, other aspects should also be assessed.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Dávila-Cervantes A. Simulación en Educación Médica. Inv Ed Med. 2014; 3(10):100-5.
  • Corvetto M, Bravo MP, Montaña R, Util F, Escudero E, Boza C, Dagnino J. Simulación en educación médica: una sinopsis. Rev Med Chile. 2013; 141:70-9.
  • Urra E, Sandoval S, Navarro I. El desafío y futuro de la simulación como estrategia de enseñanza en enfermería. Inv Ed Med. 2017; 6(22):119-25.
  • Boyde M, Cooper E, Putland H, Stanton R, Harding C, Learmont B, Nicholls L. Simulation for emergency nurses (SIREN): A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Educ Today. 2018; 68:100-4.
  • Hegland PA, Aarlie H, Strømme H, Jamtvedt G. Simulation-based training for nurses: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2017; 54:6-20.
  • Fernández-Ayuso D, del Campo-Cazallas C, Fernández-Ayuso RM. Aprendizaje en entornos de simulación de alta fidelidad: Evaluación del estrés en estudiantes de Enfermería. Educ Med. 2016; 17(1):25-8.
  • Leppanen S, Jansson M., Pesonen HM, Elo S. Effectiveness of Education in Improving the Performance of Medical Emergency Team Nurses. Clin Simul Nur. 2019; 26:64-71.
  • León-Castelao E, Maestre JM. Prebriefing in healthcare simulation: Concept analysis and terminology in Spanish. Educ Med. 2019; 20(4):238-48.
  • Kim YJ, Yoo JH. The utilization of debriefing for simulation in healthcare: A literature review. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020;43:102698.
  • Maestre JM, Rudolph JW. Teorías y estilos de debriefing: el método con buen juicio como herramienta de evaluación formativa en salud [Theories and Styles of Debriefing : the Good Judgment Method as a Tool for Formative Assessment in Healthcare]. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2015; 68(4):282-5.
  • Ha EH. Effects of peer-led debriefing using simulation with case-based learning : Written vs . observed debriefing. Nurse Educ Today. 2020; 84:104249.
  • Rueda-Medina B, Gómez-Urquiza JL, Molina-Rivas E, Tapia-Haro R, Aguilar-Ferrándiz ME, Correa-Rodríguez M. A Combination of Self-debriefing and Instructor-led Debriefing Improves Team Effectiveness in Health Science Students. Nurse Educ. 2021; 46(1):7-11.
  • Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A. More Than One Way to Debrief. A Critical Review of Healthcare Simulation Debriefing Methods. Simul Healthc. 2016; 11(3):209-17.
  • INACSL Standards Committee. INACSL Standards of Best Practice: Simulation Debriefing. Clin Simul Nur. 2016; 13(12):21-5.
  • Muller-Botti S, Maestre JM, Del Moral I, Fey M, Simon R. Linguistic validation of the debriefing assessment for simulation in healthcare in spanish and cultural validation for 8 spanish speaking countries. Simul Healthc. 2021; 16(1):13-9.
  • Simon R, Raemer DB, Rudolph JW. Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH)© Rater’s Handbook. [Evaluación del Debriefing para la Simulación en Salud (EDSS)©. Manual del evaluador]. Boston, Massachusetts: Center for Medical Simulation; 2019.
  • Brett-Fleegler M, Rudolph J, Eppich W, Monuteaux M, Fleegler E, Cheng A., Simon R. Debriefing assessment for simulation in healthcare: Development and psychometric properties. Simul Healthc. 2012; 7(5):288-94.
  • Matas A. Diseño del formato de escalas tipo Likert. REDIE. 2018; 20(1):39-77.
  • Ley Orgánica 3/2018, de 5 de diciembre, de Protección de Datos Personales y garantía de los derechos digitales. Boletín Oficial del Estado (BOE), núm. 294 de 6 de diciembre de 2018.
  • Boet S, Bould MD, Sharma B, Revees S, Naik VN, Triby E, Grantcharov T. Within-team debriefing versus instructor-led debriefing for simulation-based education: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2013; 258(1):53-8.
  • Pålsson Y, Mårtensson G, Swenne CL, Ädel E, Engström M. A peer learning intervention for nursing students in clinical practice education: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Educ Today. 2019; 51:81-7.
  • Cheng A,Eppich W, Grant V, Sherbino J, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2014; 48:657-66.
  • Kim SS, De Gagne JC. Instructor-led vs. peer-led debriefing in preoperative care simulation using standardized patients. Nurse Educ Today. 2018; 71:34-9.
  • Roh YS, Kelly M, Ho Ha E. Comparison of instructor-led versus peer-led debriefing in nursing students. Nurs Health Sci. 2016; 18(2):238-45.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet