Gutierrez-Barreto et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY 4.0., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

No abstract

IntroductionVirtual debriefing is a cardinal element to achieve the effectiveness of telesimulation. There are different instruments to assess face-to-face debriefing to determine the degree of effectiveness of debriefing; Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) instrument is one of them. This study aims to describe and compare the evaluation of raters, instructors, and students during a virtual debriefing using the DASH.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed evaluating the virtual debriefing of 30 instructors after a heart failure telesimulation scenario. The evaluation was conducted by 30 instructors, 338 undergraduate students in the seventh semester, and 7 simulation raters. The 3 versions of the DASH instrument in Spanish were applied, respectively.ResultsTwo comparisons were made, student versus instructor and rater versus instructor. Cronbach α was 0.97 for each version. The averages of the results on the DASH instrument were: 6.61 (3.34–7.0), 5.95 (4.65–7.0), and 4.84 (2.68–6.02) for student, rater, and instructor versions, respectively. The size effect between student and debriefer perspectives was 0.42. In contrast, the size effect between instructor and rater was 0.72. All differences were significant.ConclusionsThere are different rates between the persons who use the DASH. In this study, from the perspective of the instructor and rater, the difference was 1 point with a wide range, in contrast with the difference between instructor and student, which is relatively minor. It is necessary to consider the perspectives of experts in the subject to achieve a virtual debriefing of high quality and improve a debriefing by using the DASH.

No abstract