Individual versus collective debriefing after interprofessional training course simulation: The randomised DEBRIEF-SIM trial
Affiliation auteurs | !!!! Error affiliation !!!! |
Titre | Individual versus collective debriefing after interprofessional training course simulation: The randomised DEBRIEF-SIM trial |
Type de publication | Journal Article |
Year of Publication | 2021 |
Auteurs | Ciceron F, Besch G, Benkhadra M, Rouge J-A, Dupont G, Avena C, Laithier C, Girard C, Samain E, Pili-Floury S |
Journal | ANAESTHESIA CRITICAL CARE & PAIN MEDICINE |
Volume | 40 |
Pagination | 100828 |
Date Published | APR |
Type of Article | Article |
ISSN | 2352-5568 |
Mots-clés | Anaesthesia training, Debriefing practice, Learning, simulation |
Résumé | {Introduction: Debriefing is a critical phase in simulation-based education that is extremely time-consuming for the instructors. The aim of the study was to assess whether a collective debriefing was non-inferior to an individual debriefing to improve learning outcomes after a simulation session. Methods: This randomised controlled multicentre non-inferiority study included pairs comprising one resident and one student nurse in anaesthesia. Each pair underwent two sessions of a simulated life-threatening emergency held at a 6-week interval. Six participant pairs underwent simulation sessions every half-day of training. The debriefing performed after the first session was either individual (1 debriefing by pair; individual group) or collective (1 debriefing by 6 pairs; collective group). The primary outcome was the evolution of a 34-parameter technical skill score (Delta-TSS-34) between the two simulation sessions. The non-inferiority margin was 5. The change in the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills score (Delta-ANTS), and the debriefing duration per participant pair were secondary endpoint measures. Results: Respectively 23 and 21 pairs were included in the collective and individual groups. Delta-TSS-34 was non-inferior in the collective group compared to the individual group (mean intergroup difference [95% confidence interval]: 2.71 [0.44-4.98]). Delta-ANTS did not significantly differ between the two groups (median [interquartile range]: 22 [10-37] versus 25 [17-35] |
DOI | 10.1016/j.accpm.2021.100828 |