Engagement in Distance Healthcare Simulation Debriefing: A Concept Development and Framework.
Journal
Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
ISSN: 1559-713X
Titre abrégé: Simul Healthc
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101264408
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Apr 2024
08 Apr 2024
Historique:
medline:
8
4
2024
pubmed:
8
4
2024
entrez:
8
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Understanding distance health care simulation debriefing is crucial in light of the increased use of and emerging technology in remote education for reasons of accessibility, global collaboration, and continuous professional development. This article is a confluence of a number of previously published studies designed to serve as a foundation to develop the concept of "engagement in health care distance simulation debriefing" using the Schwartz-Barcott & Kim hybrid mixed methods model. The model uses 3 phases: theoretical (a realist systematic review of the literature), fieldwork (3 exploratory studies and 2 pilot experimental studies), and analytical (analysis of the theoretical and fieldwork findings through expert discussion). This study defines the concept of "engagement in health care simulation distance debriefing" through exploration of its uses and analysis in literature, interviews, and expert review. The hybrid approach to the analysis provided rigor to generate a new, reflective conceptual model. This conceptual model defines the complexity in engagement during distance debriefing and helps shape the development of simulationists and debriefers, leading to more effective distance simulations and debriefings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38587332
doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000788
pii: 01266021-990000000-00118
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 Society for Simulation in Healthcare.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
J.C.P., C.J.M., A.M. participated in the conceptualization, planning, and design of the process described in this paper. J.C.P., C.J.M., and A.M. conducted the research and data collection. All authors participated in the research and the analysis. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript. All authors have followed the instructions for authors and have read and approved the manuscript. A.M. works for Oxford Medical Simulation which produces virtual reality simulation for the education and assessment of healthcare professionals. A.C. is faculty for the Debriefing Academy, which offers debriefing courses for simulation educators. There were no sources of funding for this study. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Chang TP, Elkin R, Boyle TP, et al. Characterizing preferred terms for geographically distant simulations: distance, remote and telesimulation. Int J Healthc Simul 2022;1(3):55–65.
Harasim L. Shift happens: online education as a new paradigm in learning. Internet High Educ 2000;3(1–2):41–61.
Reich J. Failure to Disrupt: Why Technology Alone Can't Transform Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2020.
Buléon C, Caton J, Park YS, et al. The state of distance healthcare simulation during the COVID-19 pandemic: results of an international survey. Adv Simul (Lond) 2022;7(1):10.
Cheng A, Kolbe M, Grant V, et al. A practical guide to virtual debriefings: communities of inquiry perspective. Adv Simul (Lond) 2020;5:18.
Wyres M, Taylor N. COVID-19: using simulation and technology-enhanced learning to negotiate and adapt to the ongoing challenges in UK healthcare education. BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn 2020;6(6):317–319.
Gross IT, Clapper TC, Ramachandra G, et al. Setting an agenda: results of a consensus process on research directions in distance simulation. Simul Healthc 2023;18(2):100–107.
Mosher CJ, Morton A, Palaganas JC. Perspectives of engagement in distance debriefings. Adv Simul (Lond) 2021;6(1):40.
Lioce L, Lopreiato J, Downing D, Chang TP, Robertson JM, Anderson M, Diaz DA, Spain AE; the Terminology and Concepts Working Group. Healthcare Simulation Dictionary– Second Edition. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2020. AHRQ Publication No. 20–0019. Rockville, MD.
Decker S, Alinier G, Crawford SB, Gordon RM, Wilson CINACSL Standards Committee. Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best Practice™ the debriefing process. Clin Sim Nur 2021;58:27–32.
Abulebda K, Srinivasan S, Maa T, Stormorken A, Chumpitazi CE. Development, implementation, and evaluation of a faculty development workshop to enhance debriefing skills among novice facilitators. Cureus 2020;12(2):e6942.
Padgett J, Cristancho S, Lingard L, Cherry R, Haji F. Engagement: what is it good for? The role of learner engagement in healthcare simulation contexts. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2019;24(4):811–825.
Garrison DR. E-learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice. Oxfordshire, UK: Taylor & Francis; 2017.
Garrison DR. Communities of inquiry in online learning. In: Rogers PL, Berg GA, Boettcher JV, Howard C, Justice L, Schenk KD, eds. Encyclopedia of Distance Learning. 2nd ed. Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global; 2009:352–355.
Garrison DR, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. Am J Distance Educ 2001;15(1):7–23.
Norris E, Bullock I. A “learning conversation” as a style of feedback. MedEdPublish 2017;6:156.
Dahlberg K. The essence of essences–the search for meaning structures in phenomenological analysis of lifeworld phenomena. Intl J of Qual Studies on Health and Well-being 2006;1(1):11–19.
Cervero RM, Gaines JK. The impact of CME on physician performance and patient health outcomes: an updated synthesis of systematic reviews. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2015;35(2):131–138.
Sinclair P, Kable A, Levett-Jones T. The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behavior and patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep 2015;13(1):52–64.
Henrie CR, Halverson LR, Graham CR. Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: a review. Comput Educ 2015;90:36–53.
Bauer KN, Orvis KA, Ely K, Surface EA. Re-examination of motivation in learning contexts: Meta-analytically investigating the role type of motivation plays in the prediction of key training outcomes. J of Business and Psych 2016;31:33–50.
Reschly AL, Christenson SL. Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In: Christenson SL, Reschly AL, Wylie C, eds. Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. New York, NY: Springer; 2012:3–19.
Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, Paris AH. School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Rev Educ Res 2004;74:59–109.
National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. Engaging Schools: Fostering High School Students' Motivation to Learn. Committee on Increasing High School Students' Engagement and Motivation to Learn. Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2004. Available at: https://www.iteea.org/File.aspx?id=137460&v=3875d9ad. Accessed August 23, 2023.
Connell JP, Wellborn JG. Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: a motivational analysis of self-system processes. In: Gunnar MR, Sroufe LA, eds. Self Processes and Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc; 1991:43–77.
Skinner E, Belmont MJ. Motivation in the classroom: reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. J Educ Psychol 1993;85(4):571–581.
Lee VE, Smith JB. Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociol Edu 1995;68(4):241–270.
Stipek DJ. Motivation to Learn: Integrating Theory and Practice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon; 2002.
Finn JD. School Engagement & Students at Risk. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics; 1993.
Finn JD, Pannozzo GM, Voelkl KE. Disruptive and inattentive-withdrawn behavior and achievement among fourth graders. The Elementary School Journal 1995;95(5):421–434.
Finn JD, Rock DA. Academic success among students at risk for school failure. J Appl Psychol 1997;82:221–234.
Birch SH, Ladd GW. The teacher-child relationship and children's early school adjustment. J Sch Psychol 1997;35(1):61–79.
Schwartz-Barcott D, Kim HS. An expansion and elaboration of the hybrid model of concept development. In: Rodgers BL, Knafl KA, eds. Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications. 2nd ed. 2000:223–246.
Rodgers BL. Concepts, analysis and the development of nursing knowledge: the evolutionary cycle. J Adv Nurs. 1989;14:330–335.
Rodgers BL, Knafl KA. Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2000.
Chinn PL, Kramer MK. Integrated Theory and Knowledge Development in Nursing. St. Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier; 2008.
Walker LO, Avant KC. Strategies for Theory Construction in Nursing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2005.
Mosher CJ, Morton A, Tarbet A, Palaganas JC. Factors of engagement in synchronous online learning conversations and distance debriefing: a realist synthesis review. Simul Healthc 2023;18(2):126–134.
Slater M. A note on presence terminology. Presence connect 2003;3(3):1–5.
Garrison D, Anderson T, Archer W. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 1999;2(2):87–105.
Park H, Shea P. A review of ten-year research through co-citation analysis: online learning, distance learning, and blended learning. Online Learning 2020;24(2):225–244.
Gordon R. Debriefing virtual simulation using an online conferencing platform: lessons learned. Clin Simul Nur 2017;13:668–674.
Morton A, Mosher CJ, Palaganas JC. A comparative study of debriefer versus debriefee distance simulation engagement. Clin Simul Nurs 2023;74:76–86.
Morton A. Engagement in Distance Debriefing. Dissertation. Boston, MA: MGH Institute of Health Professions; 2022.
Shute VJ. Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 2008;78(1):153–189.
Pashler H, McDaniel M, Rohrer D, Bjork R. Learning styles: concepts and evidence. Psychol Sci Public Interest 2008;9(3):105–119.
Biggs JB. From theory to practice: a cognitive systems approach. High Educ Res Dev 1993;12(1):73–85.
Frerejean J, van Merriënboer JJG, Condron C, Strauch U, Eppich W. Critical design choices in healthcare simulation education: a 4C/ID perspective on design that leads to transfer. Adv Simul (Lond) 2023;8(1):5.
Bauman EB. Game-Based Teaching and Simulation in Nursing & Healthcare. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company; 2012.
Csikszentmihalyi M. The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. In: Csikszentmihalyi M, Csikszentmihalyi IS, eds. Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press; 1988:15–35.
Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience - Steps Toward Enhancing the Quality of Life. New York, NY: New York Harper Collins Publishers; 1991.
Quian M, Clark KR. Game-based learning and 21st century skills: a review of recent research. Comput Hum Behav 2016;63:50–58.
Mayer RE. Multimedia Learning: Principles and Applications. Cambridge Cambridge, United Kingdom: University Press; 2009.
Abegglen S, Greif R, Balmer Y, Znoj HJ, Nabecker S. Debriefing interaction patterns and learning outcomes in simulation: an observational mixed-methods network study. Adv Simul (Lond) 2022;7(1):28.
Holmes C, Mellanby E. Debriefing strategies for interprofessional simulation-a qualitative study. Adv Simul (Lond) 2022;7:18.
Luctkar-Flude M, Tyerman J, Verkuyl M, et al. Effectiveness of debriefing methods for virtual simulation: a systematic review. Clin Simul Nurs 2021;57:18–30.
Anderson T, Rourke L, Garrison R, Archer W. Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Online Learning 2019;5(2). Available at: https://doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875. Accessed August 23, 2023.
doi: 10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875.
Mann K, Gordon J, MacLeod A. Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2009;14(4):595–621.
Winkel AF, Yingling S, Jones AA, Nicholson J. Reflection as a learning tool in graduate medical education: a systematic review. J Grad Med Educ 2017;9(4):430–439.