Turning nursing students' mistakes into resources for learning in simulation-based training: facilitators' assumptions about providing feedback in debriefing.

Wenche Lervik, Mads Solberg, Astrid Camilla Wiig, Helen Berg
Author Information
  1. Wenche Lervik: Department of Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Ålesund, 6009, Norway. wenche.lervik@ntnu.no.
  2. Mads Solberg: Department of Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Ålesund, 6009, Norway.
  3. Astrid Camilla Wiig: Department of Educational Science, University of South-Eastern Norway, Notodden, Norway.
  4. Helen Berg: Department of Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Ålesund, 6009, Norway.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate how facilitators approach and use nursing students' mistakes in simulation-based training as learning resources in the simulation debriefing phase. Facilitators are responsible for raising students' awareness of their performances during the debriefing and facilitating reflections on their performances, including satisfactory behaviours and performance gaps. Research on facilitators' work during debriefing has highlighted various challenges, such as providing a safe and constructive climate among novice students while simultaneously teaching them the correct procedures, methods, and knowledge of caring practices to become professional nurses. There is a lack of research on how facilitators approach, handle, and use students' mistakes as a learning resource. Thus, this study investigated facilitators' assumptions about providing feedback to nursing students when they made mistakes during simulation-based training METHOD: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine experienced facilitators from three universities in Norway. Data were analyzed following the principles of thematic analysis (TA).
RESULTS: Facilitators made varying assumptions about the simulations and debriefings as learning processes. These differences were evident in their accounts of how feedback was provided to students when they made mistakes during the simulation-based training.
CONCLUSION: Facilitators' statements about their practices reflect assumptions about how they make simulation activities a resource for meaningful learning, including how to use students' mistakes as learning opportunities during debriefing discussions. Consequently, these assumptions regarding learning provide valuable insights into the ambiguous and complex praxis of using simulation-based training as a professional educational tool.

Keywords

References

  1. Froud R, Meza TJ, Ernes KO, Slowther AM. Research ethics oversight in Norway: structure, function, and challenges. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):24. [DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3816-0]
  2. Act on medical and health research (the Health Research Act). (2008).
  3. Act on Processing of Personal Data. (The Personal Data Act), (2018).
  4. Notification Form for personal data, (2022).
  5. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academies; 2000.
  6. King A, Holder MG Jr., Ahmed RA. Errors as allies: error management training in health professions education. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22(6):516–9. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000945]
  7. Palominos E, Levett-Jones T, Power T, Martinez-Maldonado R. Healthcare students’ perceptions and experiences of making errors in simulation: an integrative review. Nurse Educ Today. 2019;77:32–9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2019.02.013]
  8. Persico L, Belle A, DiGregorio H, Wilson-Keates B, Shelton C. Healthcare Simulation standards of best PracticeTM facilitation. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021;58:22–6. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2021.08.010]
  9. Røykenes K, Kvernenes M, Giske T. Endeavouring interplay: a grounded theory study of how nurse educators work with simulation-based learning. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):377. [DOI: 10.1186/s12912-023-01546-9]
  10. Topping A, Bøje RB, Rekola L, Hartvigsen T, Prescott S, Bland A, et al. Towards identifying nurse educator competencies required for simulation-based learning: a Systemized Rapid review and synthesis. Nurse Educ Today. 2015;35(11):1108–13. [DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.06.003]
  11. Cheng A, Eppich W, Kolbe M, Meguerdichian M, Bajaj K, Grant V. A conceptual Framework for the development of debriefing skills a journey of Discovery, Growth, and Maturity. Simul Healthc. 2020;15(1):55–60. [DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000398]
  12. Hall K, Tori K. Best practice recommendations for debriefing in Simulation-Based Education for Australian undergraduate nursing students: an integrative review. Clin Simul Nurs. 2017;13(1):39–50. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2016.10.006]
  13. Cheng A, Eppich W, Grant V, Sherbino J, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2014;48(7):657–66. [DOI: 10.1111/medu.12432]
  14. Abelsson A, Bisholt B. Nurse students learning acute care by simulation - focus on observation and debriefing. Nurse Educ Pract. 2017;24:6–13. [DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2017.03.001]
  15. Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-Fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A. More Than one way to debrief: a critical review of Healthcare Simulation Debriefing methods. Simul Healthc. 2016;11(3):209–17. [DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000148]
  16. Buckley C, Natesan S, Breslin A, Gottlieb M. Finessing feedback: recommendations for effective feedback in the Emergency Department. Ann Emerg Med. 2020;75(3):445–51. [DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.05.016]
  17. Eppich WJ, Hunt EA, Duval-Arnould JM, Siddall VJ, Cheng A. Structuring feedback and debriefing to achieve mastery learning goals. Acad Med. 2015;90(11):1501–8. [DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000934]
  18. Hatala R, Cook DA, Zendejas B, Hamstra SJ, Brydges R. Feedback for simulation-based procedural skills training: a meta-analysis and critical narrative synthesis. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2014;19(2):251–72. [DOI: 10.1007/s10459-013-9462-8]
  19. Hattie J, Timperley H. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res. 2007;77(1):81–112. [DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487]
  20. Fey MK, Scrandis D, Daniels A, Haut C. Learning through debriefing: students’ perspectives. Clin Simul Nurs. 2014;10(5):e249–56. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2013.12.009]
  21. Turner S, Harder N. Learning through debriefing: students’ perspectives. Clin Simul Nurs. 2018;18:47–55. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2018.02.004]
  22. Rudolph JW, Raemer DB, Simon R. Establishing a Safe Container for learning in Simulation: the role of the Presimulation briefing. Simul Healthc. 2014;9(6):339–49. [DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000047]
  23. Tosterud R, Hall-Lord ML, Petzäll K, Hedelin B. Debriefing in simulation conducted in small and large groups - nursing students’ experiences. J Nurs Educ Pract. 2014;4:9.
  24. 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. [DOI: 10.1097/01266021-200600110-00006]
  25. Sawyer T, Fleegler MB, Eppich WJ. Essentials of debriefing and feedback. In: Assoc. Prof., Vincent J, Grant M, FRCPC Department of Pediatrics., University of Calgary, editor. Comprehensive healthcare simulation: Pediatrics. Calgary, Alberta Canada: Springer; 2016. pp. 31–42.
  26. Lymer G, Sjöblom B. Interaction in post-simulation debriefing. Learn Cult Social Interact. 2024;48:100855. [DOI: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2024.100855]
  27. Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting Excellence and reflective learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended Approach to Health Care Simulation Debriefing. Simul Healthc. 2015;10(2):106–15. [DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072]
  28. Decker S, Alinier G, Crawford SB, Gordon RM, Jenkins D, Wilson C, et al. Healthcare Simulation standards of best Practice™ the debriefing process. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021;58:27–32. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2021.08.011]
  29. McQueen SA, Petrisor B, Bhandari M, Fahim C, McKinnon V, Sonnadara RR. Examining the barriers to meaningful assessment and feedback in medical training. Am J Surg. 2016;211(2):464–75. [DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.10.002]
  30. Press CU. Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary, Reference book,2009.
  31. Karlgren K, Larsson F, Dahlstrom A. Eye-opening facilitator behaviours: an Interaction analysis of facilitator behaviours that advance debriefings. BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn. 2020;6(4):220–8. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjstel-2018-000374]
  32. Smith ML. Thinking ethically about medical mistakes. J Child Neurol. 2013;28(6):809–11. [DOI: 10.1177/0883073813477690]
  33. Dai CM, Bertram K, Chahine S. Feedback credibility in Healthcare Education: a systematic review and synthesis. Med Sci Educ. 2021;31(2):923–33. [DOI: 10.1007/s40670-020-01167-w]
  34. Dieckmann P, Friis SM, Lippert A, Østergaard D. Goals, success factors, and barriers for simulation-based learning: a qualitative interview study in health care. Simul Gaming. 2017;43(5):627–47. [DOI: 10.1177/1046878112439649]
  35. Dawson P, Henderson M, Mahoney P, Phillips M, Ryan T, Boud D, et al. What makes for effective feedback: staff and student perspectives. Assess Evaluation High Educ. 2019;44(1):25–36. [DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877]
  36. Hirst JM, DiGennaro Reed FD, Reed DD. Effects of varying feedback accuracy on task acquisition: a computerized translational study. J Behav Educ. 2013;22:1–15. [DOI: 10.1007/s10864-012-9162-0]
  37. Lackie K, Hayward K, Ayn C, Stilwell P, Lane J, Andrews C, et al. Creating psychological safety in interprofessional simulation for health professional learners: a scoping review of the barriers and enablers. J Interprof Care. 2023;37(2):187–202. [DOI: 10.1080/13561820.2022.2052269]
  38. Szyld D, Rudolph JW. Debriefing with Good Judgment. The Comprehensive Textbook of Healthcare Simulation. 2013:85–93.
  39. Rudolph JW, Foldy EG, Robinson T, Kendall S, Taylor SS, Simon R. Helping without harming: the instructor’s feedback dilemma in debriefing—A case study. Simul Healthc. 2013;8(5):304–16. [DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e318294854e]
  40. Kolbe M, Grande B, Spahn DR. Briefing and debriefing during simulation-based training and beyond: Content, structure, attitude and setting. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2015;29(1):87–96. [DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2015.01.002]
  41. Dufrene C, Young A. Successful debriefing — best methods to achieve positive learning outcomes: a literature review. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34(3):372–6. [DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.026]
  42. Forstrønen A, Johnsgaard T, Brattebø G, Reime MH. Developing facilitator competence in scenario-based medical simulation: presentation and evaluation of a train the trainer course in Bergen, Norway. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020;47:102840. [DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2020.102840]

MeSH Term

Humans
Students, Nursing
Simulation Training
Norway
Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate
Clinical Competence
Formative Feedback
Learning
Feedback
Qualitative Research
Female

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0learningmistakesstudents'simulation-basedtrainingdebriefingassumptionsfacilitatorsusenursingfacilitators'providingstudentsfeedbackmadestudyapproachresourcessimulationFacilitatorsperformancesincludingpracticesprofessionalresourceSimulation-basedBACKGROUND:aiminvestigatephaseresponsibleraisingawarenessfacilitatingreflectionssatisfactorybehavioursperformancegapsResearchworkhighlightedvariouschallengessafeconstructiveclimateamongnovicesimultaneouslyteachingcorrectproceduresmethodsknowledgecaringbecomenurseslackresearchhandleThusinvestigatedMETHOD:Individualsemi-structuredinterviewsconductednineexperiencedthreeuniversitiesNorwayDataanalyzedfollowingprinciplesthematicanalysisTARESULTS:varyingsimulationsdebriefingsprocessesdifferencesevidentaccountsprovidedCONCLUSION:Facilitators'statementsreflectmakeactivitiesmeaningfulopportunitiesdiscussionsConsequentlyregardingprovidevaluableinsightsambiguouscomplexpraxisusingeducationaltoolTurningtraining:AssumptionsDebriefingExperiencesFacilitatorFeedbackNursing-students

Similar Articles

Cited By