首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Hawaii Journal of Health Social Welfare >Self-Debriefing vs Instructor Debriefing in a Pre-Internship Simulation Curriculum: Night on Call
【2h】

Self-Debriefing vs Instructor Debriefing in a Pre-Internship Simulation Curriculum: Night on Call

机译:实习前模拟课程中的自我汇报与教师汇报:值班之夜

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This study sought to determine if learner self-performance assessment (SPA) and team-performance assessment (TPA) were different when simulation based education (SBE) was supported by self-debriefing (S-DB), compared to traditional facilitator-led debriefing (F-DB). “One-Night-On-Call,” an internship preparation curriculum, was selected to provide SBE. Participants worked as team members in 4 sequential bedside acute care problem-solving scenarios. Fifty-seven learners were randomized to 9 F-DB and 10 S-DB Teams. Participants completed SPA and TPA assessment checklist questionnaires immediately following the first and fourth (final) scenarios. Learner SPA and TPA scores improved overall from the first to the fourth scenarios (P <.05). F-DB versus S-DB cohorts did not differ in overall SPA scores. The F-DB average TPA score was 12.8 (SD±2.1) compared to a S-DB score of 14.1 (SD±2.1) (P =.001). F-DB participants' increase in TPA was due to increases in the Patient Assessment and Treatment sub-domains that exceeded corresponding improvements in the S-DB cohort. Self- debriefing strategies are equivalent to facilitator-led debriefing in some situations. Self-debriefing offers opportunities to enable simulation-based education by decreasing the number of required faculty debriefers, and may be uniquely well matched to simulation-based teamwork training.
机译:这项研究旨在确定与传统的主持人主导的汇报方式相比,在基于模拟的教育(SBE)的情况下通过自我汇报(S-DB)支持学习者的自我表现评估(SPA)和团队绩效评估(TPA)是否有所不同(F-DB)。选择了实习准备课程“一夜通”来提供SBE。参与者作为团队成员在4种相继的床边急性护理问题解决方案中进行工作。 57名学习者被随机分为9个F-DB和10个S-DB团队。参与者在第一个和第四个(最终)方案之后立即完成了SPA和TPA评估清单调查表。从第一种情况到第四种情况,学习者的SPA和TPA分数总体有所提高(P <.05)。 F-DB与S-DB队列在总SPA分数上没有差异。 F-DB平均TPA得分为12.8(SD±2.1),而S-DB得分为14.1(SD±2.1)(P = .001)。 F-DB参与者的TPA增加是由于患者评估和治疗子域的增加超过了S-DB队列中相应的改善。在某些情况下,自我汇报策略等同于主持人主导的汇报。自我汇报为减少基于模拟的团队汇报的人数提供了机会,使基于模拟的教育成为可能,并且可以与基于模拟的团队合作培训完美地匹配。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号