Background. In the use of simulation as a learning approach, a structured debriefing is important for students to achieve learning. The facilitator's feedback style and abilities in facilitating are crucial, and have a great impact on the learning environment. The facilitators should facilitate for student active learning, and provide helpful feedback to empower students as self-regulated learners. The aim of the study was to explore the Steinwachs structure and the Critical Response Process structure when used in debriefing in medical simulation, and how each of them affected the facilitator's role. Method.A multi-method, comparative quasi-experimental design was used.Results. Structuring debriefing in accordance with the Critical Response Process facilitated a facilitator role that coincided with factors highlighted in theory on how to facilitate student active learning and the development self-regulating learners. Structuring debriefing in accordance with the Steinwachs structure revealed that debriefing seemed to be based more on the facilitator's frames and dominance than the students' frames and involvement.Conclusion. The results of this study showed that Critical Response Process (CRP) can be an appropriate structure to use in debriefing in medical simulation.
No abstract
Study/Objective: Test a model that was developed to compare PC screen-based vs high-fidelity simulation supported training for basic trauma skills in terms of learning and cost outcomes. Background: As disasters increase in numbers and intensity, more attention is being paid to trauma skills training for health workers. There is a wide spectrum of simulation types, and while high-fidelity simulation is known to be effective, it is also very costly. Methods: The Nursing Education Simulation Framework guided the development of a model to compare the two simulation methods in terms of confidence, knowledge, skills, and cost outcomes. Participants (N = 70) were nurses and EMT's from the civilian and military sectors. All underwent pre-testing, random assignment to PC screen-based or high-fidelity simulation training groups, trauma skills training, immediate post and then post-post (6-12-weeks) evaluation. The evaluator was blinded to the simulation training type for each participant. Results: There were no differences in the learning outcomes between the PC screen-based vs high-fidelity groups. Both groups increased their confidence, knowledge, and skills. However, the cost of high-fidelity simulation was ten times that of PC screen-based instruction per unit. Conclusion: For basic trauma nursing skills, a less costly method of instruction can achieve the same learning outcome results. Study/Objective: The study aims to explore whether there are differences between intensive care nurses' (ICN) team performance and ICN-students, measured by a validated instrument. Background: Due to lack of ICN-students working experiences, a joint high-fidelity, simulator-based training can bridge the gap between nursing school and appropriate hospital practice. Data originated from a training project in Norway. ICNs from a hospital intensive care unit collaborated with educators from a nearby university to improve ICN-students team performance, to make those students better prepared for practice. Methods: The study used an explorative design. Thirty registered nurses, who were allocated into five teams representing intensive care specialty, participated in a high-fidelity, simulationbased pneumonia with acute respiratory failure setting. Each team consists of five ICN's and one ICN-student. The Mayo High Performance Teamwork Scale was used to measure team performance. We used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare and analyze the teams' self-assessment. Results: Statistical significant differences were found between ICN-students and ICN's self-assessments on two variables: 1) The team prompts each other to attend to all significant clinical indicators throughout the procedure/intervention; and 2) When team members are actively involved with the patient, they verbalize their activities aloud. ICN's perceived and gave their support to these two assertions to a greater extent than ICN-students. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that ICNs and ICN students perceive aspects of team performance in a joint team training setting differently. IC...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.