Maria Overstreet, PhD, RN, CCNS Nashville Native History: Nurse for 25 years Simulation: just happened into it… Debriefing: Chose to perform research Simulation Consultant: Enjoy doing! Learner will become more knowledgeable of: Debriefing in respect to: History Meaning Concepts Methods Application Has anyone ever facilitated a simulation debriefing? How do you define Debriefing? WWII, Army’s chief historian, Brigadier General Marshall Performed 1st Historical Group Debriefing (HGD) Soldiers recounted events of combat, feelings, & decisions Unexpected finding was psychological benefits Termed Spiritual Purging symbolizing cleansing of one’s actions during combat Fillion, Clements, Averill, & Virgil (2002), MacDonald (2003) Mitchell (1983) a psychologist Worked with emergency services personnel Developed method of debriefing Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) Recount events, discuss actions/decisions, discuss feelings Dyregrov (1989) adapted Mitchell’s technique Emphasized process and flexibility Particularly time and routine Red Cross Debriefing of 1989 San Francisco earthquake Found small group size allowed for more intimate exploration of worker’s thoughts & feelings (12-15 for 2 hours). Concurs with Dyregrov 2 factors important: Time & timing Length of time of debriefing Proximity to the event No works from education literature are evidence based research studies. Provide important theoretical and conceptual information Lederman (1984) differentiates educational debriefing from other debriefings due to emphasis on the learning derived from the experience. Proposed term “postexperience analytic discussion process” (Lederman, 1984, p. 415) Refined term to “cognitive assimilation of experience” Author/Year Important Concepts Lederman (1984) Lederman & Ruben (1984) Assist learner in new ways of seeing, perceiving, & making sense of experience •Educator must master skill of timing: when to select right time for discussion Pearson & Smith (1986) Provide structure for debriefing process with 3 segments in question format: “what happened?”, “how did participants feel?”, & “what does it mean?” Includes aspects of military, psychological, & educational debriefing. •Requires educator with strong interpersonal & interventionist skills & skill of timing. Author/Year Important Concepts Sims (2001) A cognitive activity, “post-experience analysis” (Sims, 2001, p. 179) Utilizes Kolb’s model of learning to structure specific questions •Time in debriefing influenced by purpose, complexity, intensity, student responsiveness, & format. Petranek (2000) Extends experiential learning activity and assists learner with reflection with written debriefing, allows for time to process and gather thoughts •Primary ingredient for valuable reflection: time elapsed Author/Year Important Concepts Rudolph, Simon, Dufresne, & Raemer (2006) Developed their debriefing practice to acknowledge importance of 2 aspects: timing & relationships. Timing is immediacy to event Relationships between educator & learner defined with trust & respect Consistent with psychological debriefing Rudolph, Simon, Rivard, Dufresne, & Raemer (2007) Utilize educational learning theory: Double loop learning (Argyris & Schön, 1978) to base their practice of debriefing. •Developed communication technique, advocacy & inquiry. Communication Discussion of events: What happened? Language use: words & body Time/Timing Time is a controversial factor How long, who speaks for how long, & role of silence Timing: when to introduce or stimulate a discussion Emotion Attention to the affective domain: feelings & emotions Structure Pattern of organization, how it flows; anticipation of learner of what is to come Points to VALUE of debriefing Savoldelli, et al (2006) Verbal & verbal + video improved skill performance Jefferies & Rizzolo (2006) Learner identified debriefing as the most important design feature of simulations Learner’s self-confidence ratings increased with active learning followed by reflective exercises Lasater (2007) Studied simulation & critical thinking Comments on necessity of assisting students to cope with their emotions following simulation Addresses the affective domain of learning Johnson-Russell (2007) Presents a loose structure for debriefing Refers to 4 stages: 1. 2. 3. 4. Introduction Personal reaction [psychological component] Discussion of events [What happened?] Summary [Synthesis of knowledge, meaning making] Dewey (1938) Learning by doing Not every experience results in education or learning LEARNER must: Interact with environment Make meaning of the experience from past, present, or future Debriefing by Dewey’s theory of experiential learning… Reflective component Provides opportunity to link knowledge and experience or knowledge, skill, and meaning derived by the learner Kolb (1984) Experiential learning model Represents 4 cyclic stages learners venture through to understand experiences Reflective Observation Discuss experience, ponders what went well & not, seeks affirmation or learns alternative method, gains insight Concrete Experience Knowledge, skill, attitude, experience during clinical Abstract Experience Knowledge, skill, attitude, experience during simulation Reflective Observation Debriefing process Rich discussion of events and how to manage differently or how managed well Abstract Conceptual ization Debriefing Process Able to view situation in various contexts: different disease processes or patient response Schön (1987) Learning through reflecting as it relates to practice professions Isolated reflection & expanded on its meaning 2 methods of reflection in practice: Reflection in action (thinking while performing) Reflection on action (pose ? To self to change) Overstreet (2009) Qualitative study Case study design (4 independent cases) Data Observation & field notes Video of debriefings Facilitator interview Facilitator questionnaire Student questionnaire Original 4 concepts from literature emerged Communication Time/Timing Structure Emotion Triangulation of data sources: from both students and facilitators Accentuate the positive Higher Order Thinking Experience Counts Qualitative Research Explore phenomenon through identifying idiosyncratic patterns of behaviors When little is known Madjar & Walton, 2001 Case Study Investigate a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context Multiple sources of data Yin, 2003 Teacher Student interaction Process time spent in certain aspects of exchange Content what is communicated IRB Approval Protocol remained same for each data collection Observe Videotape Student Questionnaire Educator Semi-structured Interview Educator Questionnaire Field Notes Triangulation of multiple data sources Categorical aggregation Time-ordered analysis Pattern matching Cross-case synthesis Pre-simulation – 30 Simulation – 30 Debriefing – 25 Content – Med/surg Students – 6 (22 yr old) Silent Minutes 2 8% AD, (1 AA, 5 Cau, 1♂) Educator – Cau, ♀ Students Talk Minutes 5.22 21% 23 yr RN, used personal storytelling for emphasis Tone - Natural Educator Talk Minutes Educator Talk Minutes 18.08 71% Students Talk Minutes Silent Minutes Pre-simulation – 5 Simulation – 105 Debriefing – 47 Content – Skill practice Students – 7 (22 yr old) Communication w/pt. BSN, (1AA, 6 Cau, all ♀) Educator – 2, Cau, ♀ 14 & 4 yrs RN Structured, safe & trusting atmosphere Pre-simulation – 5 Simulation – 50 Debriefing – 28 Content – Cardiac/ED Students – 3 (38 yr old) Decisions at point of care BSN, (All Cau, 1 ♂, previous roles) Educator – 2, Cau, ♀ 18/10 yr RN Feedback(-),(93 ?/20min) Pre-simulation – 5 Simulation – 90 Debriefing – 38 ContentSepsis/ED/ICU Decisions at point of care Educator Talk Minutes Student – 7 (22 yr old) Student Talk Minutes 5.05 13% Silent Minutes 2.5 7% BSN, 1 AA, 1 ♂ Educator - ♀ Cau. 38 yr RN/34 yr teaching Interweave of emotion Educator Talk Minutes 30.35 80% Student Talk Minutes Silent Minutes Percentage of Time by Case 100% 80% 8% 20% 0% 49% 20% 9% 7% 13% 60% 40% 20% Silent 72% 51% 71% 80% Students Talk Educator Talk 0% Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 2 CASE 3 CASE 3 CASE 4 Educator 1 Educator 1 Educator 2 Educator 1 Educator 2 Educator 1 TAUGHT AT INSTITUTION 23 3 0 2 2 3 14 7 5 2 2 3 4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 18 4 3 0.5 0.5 4 10 5 5 1 0.5 5 38 34 34 2 3 5.5 HIGHEST DEGREE BSN MSN MSN MSN MSN DNP TAKEN EDUCATION COURSES Yes Yes No No No Yes READ ABOUT DEBRIEFING Yes No No Yes No Yes ATTENDED CONFERENCE/WORKSHOP Yes Yes Yes No No Yes HOW LEARNED DEBRIEFING METHOD USED Trial & error, Jeffries book, internet search Conferences and individual teaching session Life experiences Talking with students in clinical Trial and error, watching others Reading, doing, and making adjustment YEARS AS RN TAUGHT CLINICAL TAUGHT CLASSROOM TAUGHT SIMULATION TAUGHT DEBRIEFING Structure All 4 heavy in structure, physical environment Case 1: driven by written questions Case 2: (+) peer feedback Case 3: knowledge questions Case 4: less defined: variety of teaching methods Communication Listening: to hear with thoughtful attention Language: words, pronunciation, includes tone and body Pattern frequencies: links, swoops, timing Case 4 – swoop 8 times / Case 2 – no swoops in analysis Time Time spent in debriefing – 25-47 min. Educator talk time 18 – 30 min. Silence 0 – 5 min. Case 2: Outlier student talk time Case 3: Students answered 57 X in 2.5 min(2.6 sec/answer) Emotion Case 1 & 4: Storytelling and interweave of emotion Case 3: Negative vs positive feedback (18/9/5) “I was thinking their knowledge base was a little more than what it may have been” Accentuate the Positive Higher Order Thinking Experience Counts • Educators unanimously perceived students & themselves (+) “I try to end it in a positive by asking the students a couple of things they learned today that they didn’t know before…” “Cause we want them to leave feeling positive about simulation and not being terrified and being embarrassed cause we are using simulation in every single course” • Students: What did today’s debriefing mean? “It was feedback I needed to hear. It helps me identify + and -.” “to discuss people’s strengths and areas that need to be worked on in a positive manner” • Putting It All Together Meaning making: Students “Debriefing just put all the pieces of the puzzle together” “Debriefing helped to pull everything together & make sense of it all” Meaning making: Educators Case 1: predetermined goal to connect theory & practice Case 2: tie together student improvement Case 3: tried to tie together knowledge from simulation Case 4: cannot refrain from teachable moment • Decision Making and Critical Thinking • • • • • Case 1 & 3: Dialogue about how decisions were made Case 3: “You get to find out more about what they were thinking…” Case 2: Skill focused: therapeutic communication process Case 4: minimal skill focus, knowledge questions to ponder, overlaid with attention to attitude Students: “Helps you learn & think critically” “to focus on your patient & not the monitors. Also it is important to think critically & prioritize your care” Educators brought themselves to debriefing More experienced vs. less experienced Students value experience “We practiced on a plastic dummy which just increased our chances of responding appropriately to the situation in real life” Strengths Design •Strategies to increase trustworthines s Limitation s Generalizability Triangulation of multiple data sources, Peer review, Identification of own biases Small sample size: 4 cases Strategies to strengthen validity Potential Effects of Direct Observation : Categorical aggregation, Timeordered analysis, Pattern matching, Cross-case synthesis Hawthorne, Halo, Error of Leniency and Error of Severity Participants: University, Educator, & Student Limited camera view of student Theory Literature Military, Psychology, Education Concepts Dewey, Kolb, Schön Communication, Time/Timing, Structure, Emotion Research Patterns Accentuate +, higher order thinking, experience counts Information to consider as you develop your own style of debriefing Ask yourself the question How will I address these concepts in debriefing? Objectives for simulation add depth to debriefing Are you going to allow the objectives for the simulation to guide the debriefing, structure the debriefing, limit the debriefing… View code simulation What is the objective for the simulation? 1.) to feel the urgency of being involved in a code situation? 2.) to administer accurate CPR? Will you be very rigid with time Will you be lax with time Literature points to time as important: How long? … As long as the experiential learning For true reflection – have to spend silent time thinking Video tape yourself…you will learn a lot! Language is a powerful tool. Example: [ + / Δ ] How do you communicate this to the learner? What was good/bad? What was done well/what can be improved? How do you list these items? Include the learner in coming up with the items Theory Literature What literature you produce Concepts Your theory Concepts you discover in your practice or observe in other’s practice Research Patterns Patterns you produce or you observe