Kirkpatrick's Evaluation of Simulation and Debriefing in Health Care Education: A Systematic Review

Johnston, Sandra; Coyer, Fiona; Nash, Robyn

doi:10.3928/01484834-20180618-03

Cited by 109 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the assessment tools must be valid and, thus, careful background studies on assessment must be performed [ 38 ]. To link the Kirkpatrick’s model is undoubtedly warranted in a modern healthcare assessment strategy to assure the validity and clinical relevance and, thus, more high-end studies are needed to evolve PsR [ 39 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation-Based Virtual-Reality Patient-Specific Rehearsal Prior to Endovascular Procedures: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-specific rehearsal (PsR) is a new concept whereby a procedure can be rehearsed virtually using the exact patient’s anatomical data prior to performing the real procedure. The aim of this study was to ascertain if endovascular virtual-reality PsR simulation enhanced performance in real life. This was done by performing a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science concerning PsR in endovascular procedures. All publications were handled using Covidence. Reference lists were also screened. Data extracted from the studies were realism rating, procedure time, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, number of angiograms and reduction of errors. Kirkpatrick’s four-level model for measuring the efficiency of training was used for guidance of the relevance of studies. The search yielded 1155 results after the exclusion of duplicates, and 11 studies were included. Four studies had a control group, including one randomized trial; the remaining seven were feasibility studies. The realism was rated high, and overall, the studies showed improvements in procedure time, fluoroscopy time and contrast volume after PsR. One study assessed and confirmed the reduction in errors after PsR. Only two studies included more than 15 patients in their cohort. Kirkpatrick’s model was applied to all studies, with one study reaching level 4. All studies found the concept of PsR to be feasible and realistic. The studies with a control group showed a reduction of overall procedure time, radiation exposure and potential errors in endovascular procedures following PsR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation-Based Virtual-Reality Patient-Specific Rehearsal Prior to Endovascular Procedures: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reporting guidelines for interventions (e.g., [ 42 ]) will be used to structure the presentation of the reported interventions. We will use Kirkpatrick’s four-level model [ 43 ] as a framework for the analysis of the different learning outcomes reported.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research on simulation in radiography education: a scoping review protocol

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Today, there are fewer opportunities for health care students and staff for skills training through direct patient contact. The World Health Organization therefore recommends learning about patient safety through hands-on experience and simulation. Simulation has the potential to improve skills through training in a controlled environment, and simulation has a positive effect on knowledge and skills, and even patient-related outcomes. Reviews addressing the use of simulation across the different radiography specialties are lacking. Further knowledge on simulation in radiography education is needed to inform curriculum design and future research. The purpose of this scoping review is to explore, map, and summarize the extent, range, and nature of published research on simulation in radiography education. Methods We will follow the methodological framework for scoping reviews originally described by Arksey and O’Malley. We will search the MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, The Cochrane Library, ERIC, Scopus, and sources of grey literature. A comprehensive search strategy for Ovid MEDLINE was developed in collaboration with a research librarian. An example of a full electronic search from the Ovid MEDLINE (1641 articles records, January 9, 2020) is provided and will be used to adapt the search strategy to each database. Two independent review authors will screen all abstracts and titles, and full-text publications during a second stage. Next, they will extract data from each included study using a data extraction form informed by the aim of the study. A narrative account of all studies included will be presented. We will present a simple numerical analysis related to the extent, nature, and distribution of studies, and we will use content analysis to map the different simulation interventions and learning design elements reported. Any type of simulation intervention within all types of radiography specializations will be included. Our search strategy is not limited by language or date of publication. Discussion An overview of publications on simulation in radiography education across all radiography specialties will help to inform future research and will be useful for stakeholders within radiography education using simulation, both in the academic and clinical settings. Systematic review registration Open Science Framework (OSF). Submitted on October 18, 2020

show abstract

“…The Kirkpatrick model has been popular for straightforward, practical evaluation of training interventions by K1 = reaction, K2 = learning, K3 = behaviour, and K4 = results [6], especially in medical education [7,8]. Many BEME systematic reviews have used the model to filter and summarize [1], and its use to organize and synthesize systematic reviews and 'quality-score' quantitative evidence extends across diverse health-care education [9][10][11]. The common inferences that these 'levels' are a causal sequence (K1→K2→K3→K4) or hierarchical in value (K4>K3>K2>K1) have attracted criticism though [7,8].…”

Section: The Popularity Of the Kirkpatrick Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysing synthesis of evidence in a systematic review in health professions education: observations on struggling beyond Kirkpatrick

Maudsley

Taylor

2020

Medical Education Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Systematic reviews in health professions education may well under-report struggles to synthesize disparate evidence that defies standard quantitative approaches. This paper reports further process analysis in a previously reported systematic review about mobile devices on clinical placements. Objective: For a troublesome systematic review: (1) Analyse further the distribution and reliability of classifying the evidence to Maxwell quality dimensions (beyond 'Does it work?') and their overlap with Kirkpatrick K-levels. (2) Analyse how the abstracts represented those dimensions of the evidence-base. (3) Reflect on difficulties in synthesis and merits of Maxwell dimensions. Design: Following integrative synthesis of 45 K2-K4 primary studies (by combined contentthematic analysis in the pragmatism paradigm): (1) Hierarchical cluster analysis explored overlap between Maxwell dimensions and K-levels. Independent and consensus-coding to Maxwell dimensions compared (using: percentages; kappa; McNemar hypothesis-testing) prevs post-discussion and (2) article abstract vs main body. (3) Narrative summary captured process difficulties and merits. Results: (1) The largest cluster (five-cluster dendrogram) was acceptability-accessibility-K1appropriateness-K3, with K1 and K4 widely separated. For article main bodies, independent coding agreed most for appropriateness (good; adjusted kappa = 0.78). Evidence increased significantly pre-post-discussion about acceptability (p = 0.008; 31/45→39/45), accessibility, and equity-ethics-professionalism. (2) Abstracts suggested efficiency significantly less than main bodies evidenced: 31.1% vs 44.4%, p = 0.031. 3) Challenges and merits emerged for before, during, and after the review. Conclusions: There should be more systematic reporting of process analysis about difficulties synthesizing suboptimal evidence-bases. In this example, Maxwell dimensions were a useful framework beyond K-levels for classifying and synthesizing the evidence-base.

show abstract

Kirkpatrick's Evaluation of Simulation and Debriefing in Health Care Education: A Systematic Review

Abstract: Results indicated a paucity of studies at the highest levels of evaluation, indicating an area where future research is needed to assist with the development and improvement of simulation education. [J Nurs Educ. 2018;57(7):393-398.].

Cited by 109 publications

References 36 publications

Simulation-Based Virtual-Reality Patient-Specific Rehearsal Prior to Endovascular Procedures: A Systematic Review

Simulation-Based Virtual-Reality Patient-Specific Rehearsal Prior to Endovascular Procedures: A Systematic Review

Research on simulation in radiography education: a scoping review protocol

Analysing synthesis of evidence in a systematic review in health professions education: observations on struggling beyond Kirkpatrick

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About