Dataset Information

Resident versus faculty member simulation debriefing.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but it has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation. In this study, we sought to compare debriefing sessions of internal medicine (IM) intern simulation sessions led by academic faculty doctors with those led by senior IM residents in order to measure the effectiveness of near-peer teaching in this setting. Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation METHOD: Internal medicine interns participated in four simulation cases, two of which were debriefed by faculty members and two of which were debriefed by residents. Pre-simulation knowledge assessment was completed prior to the case. Following each debriefing, interns completed a Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) survey. Post-simulation knowledge assessments were completed 6 months after simulation. Debriefings were recorded and transcribed. Each statement made during debriefing was classified as either correct or erroneous by blinded reviewers. RESULTS:Fifty interns participated in simulation, and the response rate on the DASH survey was 88%. There was no difference between DASH scores (p = 0.13), post-simulation knowledge assessments or error rates during debriefing (p = 0.31) for faculty member and resident instructors. CONCLUSION:Our study suggests that residents and faculty members provide a similar quality of simulation instruction based on qualitative and quantitative evaluation.

SUBMITTER: Adams T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5955800 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Resident versus faculty member simulation debriefing.

Adams Traci T Newton Chad C Patel Hetal H Sulistio Melanie M Tomlinson Andrew A Lee Won W

The clinical teacher 20171116 6

<h4>Background</h4>Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but it has not been compared with faculty member teaching in resident simulation. In this study, we sought to compare debriefing sessions of internal medicine (IM) intern simulation sessions led by academic faculty doctors with those led by senior IM residents in order to measure the effectiveness of near-peer teaching in this setting. Near-peer teaching is effective in graduate medical education, but has not been ...[more]

PMID: 29144023

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInterprofessional education is becoming more common worldwide. Simulation is one format in which this can effectively take place. The debriefing after the simulation is a critical part of the simulation process as it allows reflection and discussion of concepts that arose during the simulation. Debriefing has been noted to be challenging in the literature. Debriefing after interprofessional simulation (IPS) is likely to have even more challenges, many related to the different backgrounds (profession, specialty) of the learners. This study was designed to investigate: 'How do differing learner professions impact on delivery of post simulation debriefing after team based interprofessional simulation-what are the challenges and what strategies can be used to overcome them?'MethodsAn initial review of the literature was used to identify current understanding and potential themes requiring further exploration. Using the results from the literature as a starting point for topics and questions to be asked, semi-structured interviews were planned, with those who are experienced in debriefing after IPS. The interviews were transcribed then analysed using a framework analysis.ResultsThe literature search resulted in twenty relevant papers. Four dimensions were drawn out from these papers that were directly related to debriefing after IPS: 'the debriefer', 'method of debriefing', 'the learner' and 'psychological safety'. Sixteen interviews occurred between June and August 2020. Ten themes were extracted from the analysis of the transcripts of these interviews: number and specialty of debriefers, credibility, assumptions/preconceptions, nurses vs doctors, method of debriefing, the learner, hierarchy, safe learning environment, inclusion of all learners, and number of debriefers. These themes were fitted in the four dimensions identified in the literature search, and discussed as so.ConclusionSeveral challenges and strategies were identified during this study. 'It depends' was a common answer received in the interviews suggesting that there is very little advice that can be given that applies to every situation. The main recommendation from this study is the support for an interprofessional group of debriefers in IPS although this does introduce its own challenges. Further research is suggested around the hierarchy found in IPS debriefing and how this translates to and from clinical practice.

Project description:IntroductionRapid-cycle deliberate practice (RCDP) is a simulation-based educational strategy that consists of repeating a simulation scenario a number of times to acquire a planned competency. When the objective of a cycle is achieved, a new cycle initiates with increased skill complexity. There have been no previous randomized studies comparing after-event debriefing clinical manikin-based simulation to RCDP in adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).MethodsWe invited physicians from the post-graduate program on Emergency Medicine of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein. Groups were randomized 1:1 to RCDP or after-event debriefing simulation prior to the first station of CPR training. During the first 5 min of the pre-intervention scenario, both groups participated in a simulated case of an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without facilitator interference; after the first 5 min, each scenario was then facilitated according to group allocation (RCDP or after-event debriefing). In a second scenario of CPR later in the day with the same participants, there was no facilitator intervention, and the planned outcomes were evaluated. The primary outcome was the chest compression fraction during CPR in the post-intervention scenario. Secondary outcomes comprised time for recognition of the cardiac arrest, time for first verbalization of the cardiac arrest initial rhythm, time for first defibrillation, and mean pre-defibrillation pause.ResultsWe analyzed data of three courses conducted between June 2018 and July 2019, with 76 participants divided into 9 teams. Each team had a median of 8 participants. In the post-intervention scenario, the RCDP teams had a significantly higher chest compression fraction than the after-event debriefing group (80.0% vs 63.6%; p = 0.036). The RCDP group also demonstrated a significantly lower time between recognition of the rhythm and defibrillation (6 vs 25 s; p value = 0.036).ConclusionRCDP simulation strategy is associated with significantly higher manikin chest compression fraction during CPR when compared to an after-event debriefing simulation.

Project description:Background:Assessment of trainees' competency is challenging; the predictive power of traditional evaluations is debatable especially in regard to noncognitive traits. New assessments need to be sought to better understand affective areas like personality. Grit, defined as "perseverance and passion for long-term goals," can assess aspects of personality. Grit predicts educational attainment and burnout rates in other populations and is accurate with an informant report version. Self-assessments, while useful, have inherent limitations. Faculty's ability to accurately assess trainees' grit could prove helpful in identifying learner needs and avenues for further development. Objective:This study sought to determine the correlation between EM resident self-assessed and faculty-assessed Grit Scale (Grit-S) scores of that same resident. Methods:Subjects were PGY-1 to -4 EM residents and resident-selected faculty as part of a larger multicenter trial involving 10 EM residencies during 2017. The Grit-S Scale was administered to participating EM residents; an informant version was completed by their self-selected faculty. Correlation coefficients were computed to assess the relationship between residents' self-assessed and the residents' faculty-assessed Grit-S score. Results:A total of 281 of 303 residents completed the Grit-S, for a 93% response rate; 200 of 281 residents had at least one faculty-assessed Grit-S score. No correlation was found between residents' self-assessed and faculty-assessed Grit-S scores. There was a correlation between the two faculty-assessed Grit-S scores for the same resident. Conclusion:There was no correlation between resident and faculty-assessed Grit-S scores; additionally, faculty-assessed Grit-S scores of residents were higher. This corroborates the challenges faculty face at accurately assessing aspects of residents they supervise. While faculty and resident Grit-S scores did not show significant concordance, grit may still be a useful predictive personality trait that could help shape future training.

Project description:BackgroundSimulation is increasingly being used in postgraduate medical education as an opportunity for competency assessment. However, there is limited direct evidence that supports performance in the simulation lab as a surrogate of workplace-based clinical performance for non-procedural tasks such as resuscitation in the emergency department (ED). We sought to directly compare entrustment scoring of resident performance in the simulation environment to clinical performance in the ED.MethodsThe resuscitation assessment tool (RAT) was derived from the previously implemented and studied Queen's simulation assessment tool (QSAT) via a modified expert review process. The RAT uses an anchored global assessment scale to generate an entrustment score and narrative comments. Emergency medicine (EM) residents were assessed using the RAT on cases in simulation-based examinations and in the ED during resuscitation cases from July 2016 to June 2017. Resident mean entrustment scores were compared using Pearson's correlation coefficient to determine the relationship between entrustment in simulation cases and in the ED. Inductive thematic analysis of written commentary was conducted to compare workplace-based with simulation-based feedback.ResultsThere was a moderate, positive correlation found between mean entrustment scores in the simulated and workplace-based settings, which was statistically significant (r = 0.630, n = 17, p < 0.01). Further, qualitative analysis demonstrated overall management and leadership themes were more common narratives in the workplace, while more specific task-based feedback predominated in the simulation-based assessment. Both workplace-based and simulation-based narratives frequently commented on communication skills.ConclusionsIn this single-center study with a limited sample size, assessment of residents using entrustment scoring in simulation settings was demonstrated to have a moderate positive correlation with assessment of resuscitation competence in the workplace. This study suggests that resuscitation performance in simulation settings may be an indicator of competence in the clinical setting. However, multiple factors contribute to this complicated and imperfect relationship. It is imperative to consider narrative comments in supporting the rationale for numerical entrustment scores in both settings and to include both simulation and workplace-based assessment in high-stakes decisions of progression.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency medicine (EM) residency programs have transitioned from traditional in-person to virtual synchronous didactics to comply with social distancing guidelines. This study explores the perceptions of EM residents and faculty regarding this new virtual format.MethodsThis was a multicenter, cross-sectional study at five EM residencies using a mixed-methods approach to investigate resident and faculty perceptions of virtual didactics. Institutions selected reflect different program lengths and geographic locations. Quantitative data measured on a Likert scale were summarized as percentages. Differences were calculated using Welch's t-test and chi-square, where p < 0.05 was significant. Open-ended responses were analyzed qualitatively.ResultsOur response rate was 64% (n = 141) for residents and 48% (n = 108) for faculty. Fifty-one percent of faculty and 54% of residents felt that they were more likely to attend virtually than in person. Among residents, 77% felt that they were more likely to attend virtual conferences during vacation or elective rotations. Perceived retention of information from virtual sessions was perceived to be the same or better for 69% of residents and 58% of faculty. Residents felt that they paid more attention in the virtual format (29% vs. 26%, p = 0.037). Both groups missed the social interactions of in-person conference (86% of faculty, 75% of residents). Respondents from both groups felt that < 20% of total didactic time should remain virtual once social distancing recommendations are lifted. Qualitative analysis revealed recommendations from residents and faculty to optimize lecture style and interactivity. Decreased commute time and ability to multitask at home increased wellness for both groups.ConclusionsWhile benefits of virtual didactics were acknowledged, residents and faculty missed the social interaction of in-person conference and preferred < 20% of future didactics to be virtual. Further research should assess the difference in knowledge acquisition and retention between conference models.

Dataset Information

Resident versus faculty member simulation debriefing.

Publications

Resident versus faculty member simulation debriefing.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets