Cargando…
Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Debriefing is a critical component to promote effective learning during simulation-based training. Traditionally, debriefing is provided only after the end of a scenario. A possible alternative is to debrief specific portions during an ongoing simulation session (stop-and-go debriefing)....
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6727540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31488113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1772-y |
_version_ | 1783449272720556032 |
---|---|
author | Schober, Patrick Kistemaker, Kay R. J. Sijani, Fereshte Schwarte, Lothar A. van Groeningen, Dick Krage, Ralf |
author_facet | Schober, Patrick Kistemaker, Kay R. J. Sijani, Fereshte Schwarte, Lothar A. van Groeningen, Dick Krage, Ralf |
author_sort | Schober, Patrick |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Debriefing is a critical component to promote effective learning during simulation-based training. Traditionally, debriefing is provided only after the end of a scenario. A possible alternative is to debrief specific portions during an ongoing simulation session (stop-and-go debriefing). While this alternative has theoretical advantages, it is not commonly used due to concerns that interruptions disturb the fidelity and adversely affect learning. However, both approaches have not been rigorously compared, and effects on skill acquisition and learning experience are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 50 medical students participating in a simulation-based cardiopulmonary resuscitation training to either a post-scenario debriefing or stop-and-go debriefing. After four weeks, participants performed a repeat scenario, and their performance was assessed using a generic performance score (primary outcome). A difference of 3 or more points was considered meaningful. A 5-item questionnaire was used to assess the subjective learning experience and the perceived stress level (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the groups for the performance score (mean difference: -0.35, 95%CI: -2.46 to 1.77, P = 0.748, n = 48). The confidence limits excluding the specified relevant 3-point difference suggest equivalence of both techniques with respect to the primary outcome. No significant differences were observed for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Stop-and-go debriefing does not adversely affect skill acquisition compared to the classic post-scenario debriefing strategy. This finding is reassuring when interruptions are deemed necessary and gives simulation instructors the latitude to tailor the timing of the debriefing individually, rather than adhering to the unsupported dogma that scenarios should not be interrupted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: As this study is not a clinical trial, it was not registered in a clinical trials register. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6727540 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67275402019-09-12 Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial Schober, Patrick Kistemaker, Kay R. J. Sijani, Fereshte Schwarte, Lothar A. van Groeningen, Dick Krage, Ralf BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Debriefing is a critical component to promote effective learning during simulation-based training. Traditionally, debriefing is provided only after the end of a scenario. A possible alternative is to debrief specific portions during an ongoing simulation session (stop-and-go debriefing). While this alternative has theoretical advantages, it is not commonly used due to concerns that interruptions disturb the fidelity and adversely affect learning. However, both approaches have not been rigorously compared, and effects on skill acquisition and learning experience are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 50 medical students participating in a simulation-based cardiopulmonary resuscitation training to either a post-scenario debriefing or stop-and-go debriefing. After four weeks, participants performed a repeat scenario, and their performance was assessed using a generic performance score (primary outcome). A difference of 3 or more points was considered meaningful. A 5-item questionnaire was used to assess the subjective learning experience and the perceived stress level (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the groups for the performance score (mean difference: -0.35, 95%CI: -2.46 to 1.77, P = 0.748, n = 48). The confidence limits excluding the specified relevant 3-point difference suggest equivalence of both techniques with respect to the primary outcome. No significant differences were observed for secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Stop-and-go debriefing does not adversely affect skill acquisition compared to the classic post-scenario debriefing strategy. This finding is reassuring when interruptions are deemed necessary and gives simulation instructors the latitude to tailor the timing of the debriefing individually, rather than adhering to the unsupported dogma that scenarios should not be interrupted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: As this study is not a clinical trial, it was not registered in a clinical trials register. BioMed Central 2019-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6727540/ /pubmed/31488113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1772-y Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Schober, Patrick Kistemaker, Kay R. J. Sijani, Fereshte Schwarte, Lothar A. van Groeningen, Dick Krage, Ralf Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
title | Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | effects of post-scenario debriefing versus stop-and-go debriefing in medical simulation training on skill acquisition and learning experience: a randomized controlled trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6727540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31488113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1772-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schoberpatrick effectsofpostscenariodebriefingversusstopandgodebriefinginmedicalsimulationtrainingonskillacquisitionandlearningexperiencearandomizedcontrolledtrial AT kistemakerkayrj effectsofpostscenariodebriefingversusstopandgodebriefinginmedicalsimulationtrainingonskillacquisitionandlearningexperiencearandomizedcontrolledtrial AT sijanifereshte effectsofpostscenariodebriefingversusstopandgodebriefinginmedicalsimulationtrainingonskillacquisitionandlearningexperiencearandomizedcontrolledtrial AT schwartelothara effectsofpostscenariodebriefingversusstopandgodebriefinginmedicalsimulationtrainingonskillacquisitionandlearningexperiencearandomizedcontrolledtrial AT vangroeningendick effectsofpostscenariodebriefingversusstopandgodebriefinginmedicalsimulationtrainingonskillacquisitionandlearningexperiencearandomizedcontrolledtrial AT krageralf effectsofpostscenariodebriefingversusstopandgodebriefinginmedicalsimulationtrainingonskillacquisitionandlearningexperiencearandomizedcontrolledtrial |