Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Debriefing Using a Structured and Supported Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Comprehensive Textbook of Healthcare Simulation

Abstract

Debriefing is recognized as a best practice in simulation education but is only one of several methods of providing participant feedback. The purpose of a debriefing is to provide students with the opportunity for review of their simulation experience through facilitated dialogue which leads to reflection, enhanced learning, and change in practice. In this chapter, the authors describe the development and use of a structured method for debriefing individuals and teams of providers. Developed in collaboration with the American Heart Association, the “structured and supported method” includes three phases with associated goals, objectives, and time frames. Many simulation educators are busy, practicing professionals. Because of this, the primary development goal was to build a streamlined debriefing method which was both easy to learn and scalable. It was also important that the method drew on available literature and was validated by use at the Winter Institute for Simulation Education and Research (WISER). Another aspect when considering the method includes use of the gather, analyze, and summarize (GAS) debriefing tool. This tool allows even novice debriefers to rapidly gain skill in debriefing while remaining comfortable with the process. Ability to maintain a student-centric, safe environment where gaps in knowledge, skill, or performance are identified and addressed is central to the method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cantrell MA. The importance of debriefing in clinical simulations. Clin Simul Nursing. 2008;4(2):e19–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. McDonnell LK, Jobe KK, Dismukes RK. Facilitating LOS debriefings: a training manual. NASA technical memorandum 112192. Ames Research Center: North American Space Administration; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. O’Donnell JM, Rodgers D, Lee W, et al. Structured and supported debriefing (interactive multimedia program). Dallas: American Heart Association (AHA); 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Decker S. Integrating guided reflection into simulated learning experiences. In: Jeffries PR, editor. Simulation in nursing education from conceptualization to evaluation. New York: National League for Nursing; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dewey J. Democracy and education: an introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: The Macmillan Company; 1916.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Goffman E. Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper & Row; 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bandura A, Adams NE, Beyer J. Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1977;35(3):125–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lewin K. Field theory and learning. In: Cartwright D, editor. Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers. London: Social Science Paperbacks; 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kolb D. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schön DA. Educating the reflective practitioner: toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. 1st ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lave J, Wenger E. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press; 1991.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med. 2004;79(10 Suppl):S70–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):988–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Heizmann S. Can we create gifted people? Ciba Found Symp. 1993;178:222–31; discussion 232–49.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ericsson KA, Lehmann AC. Expert and exceptional performance: evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annu Rev Psychol. 1996;47:273–305.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that can lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. JAMA. 2005;27(1):1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  17. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):50–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Salas E, Klein C, King H, et al. Debriefing medical teams: 12 evidence-based best practices and tips. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34(9):518–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Dufresne RL, Raemer DB. There’s no such thing as “nonjudgmental” debriefing: a theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simul Healthc. 2006;1(1):49–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Raemer DB, Eppich WJ. Debriefing as formative assessment: closing performance gaps in medical education. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):1010–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Rivard P, et al. Debriefing with good judgment: combining rigorous feedback with genuine inquiry. Anesthesiol Clin. 2007;25(2):361–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(2):115–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng A, Fanning R, Nadkarni V, Savoldelli G. Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(Suppl):S52–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, Joo HS, Chow R, Hamstra SJ. Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology. 2006;105(2):279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hodges B, Regehr G, Martin D. Difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence: novice physicians who are unskilled and unaware of it. Acad Med. 2001;76(10 Suppl):S87–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kruger J, Dunning D. Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999;77(6):1121–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Albanese M, Dottl S, Mejicano G, et al. Distorted perceptions of competence and incompetence are more than regression effects. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2006;11(3):267–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Byrnes PD, Crawford M, Wong B. Are they safe in there? – patient safety and trainees in the practice. Aust Fam Physician. 2012;41(1–2):26–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Higginson I, Hicks A. Unconscious incompetence and the foundation years. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(11):887.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Straker D. Techniques for changing minds: questioning. 2002. http://changingminds.org/techniques/questioning/. Accessed 18 May 2012.

  31. Brophy JL. Active listening: techniques to promote conversation. SCI Nurs. 2007;24(2):3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Peter M. Winter Institute for Simulation, Education and Research (WISER), Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Paul E. Phrampus MD

  2. Department of Emergency Medicine, UPMC Center for Quality Improvement and Innovation, University of Pittsburgh, 230 McKee Place Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Paul E. Phrampus MD

  3. Nurse Anesthesia Program, University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    John M. O’Donnell RN, CRNA, MSN, DrPH

  4. Department of Anesthesiology, Peter M. Winter Institute for Simulation, Education and Research (WISER), 360A Victoria Building, 3500 Victoria St., Pittsburgh, PA, 15261, USA

    John M. O’Donnell RN, CRNA, MSN, DrPH

  5. Department of Acute/Tertiary Care, University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    John M. O’Donnell RN, CRNA, MSN, DrPH

Authors
  1. Paul E. Phrampus MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John M. O’Donnell RN, CRNA, MSN, DrPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul E. Phrampus MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Anesthesiology Otolaryngology, and Structural & Chemical Biology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Adam I. Levine MD

  2. Department of Anesthesiology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Samuel DeMaria Jr. MD , Andrew D. Schwartz MD  & Alan J. Sim MD ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Phrampus, P.E., O’Donnell, J.M. (2013). Debriefing Using a Structured and Supported Approach. In: Levine, A.I., DeMaria, S., Schwartz, A.D., Sim, A.J. (eds) The Comprehensive Textbook of Healthcare Simulation. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5993-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5993-4_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5992-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5993-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation