Literature DB >> 33525672

Debriefing and Learning Strategies: A Comparison between Two Reflective Analysis Styles with/without a Graphical Record of Strengths/Weaknesses.

Guillermo Escribano Sánchez1, María Ruzafa-Martínez2, César Leal-Costa2, José Luis Díaz-Agea1, Antonio Jesús Ramos-Morcillo2, Alfonso García Sánchez1.   

Abstract

Background: Clinical simulation efficiently complements the training of Nursing Degree students. The debriefing phase is the most important feature of simulation-based learning, where the students are able to acquire the necessary competences. It is at this stage where learning strategies and motivation play a crucial role. The objective of the study was to analyze the relationship between the style of debriefing utilized in the simulation sessions, and the learning strategies of Nursing Degree students who participated in a high-fidelity clinical simulation. Method: This was a quasi-experimental study conducted with a sample of 200 students in their third and fourth years at university. To obtain the data, an evaluation Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Learning Strategies of University Students (CEVEAPEU) was utilized, as well as two different types of structured debriefing styles, namely, with or without a graphical representation of the strengths/weaknesses during the analytical phase. The data analysis was performed with the SPSS® v25 program.
Results: Statistically significant differences were found, with higher scores obtained when utilizing debriefing with a graphical representation, on both scales of the questionnaire (affective and cognitive), on the motivational, metacognitive and processing, and use of information subscales, and twelve learning strategies mostly belonging to the subscales of motivation; searching, collecting, and selecting information; and processing and using information.
Conclusion: Debriefing with a graphical representation is deemed, a priori, as the most adequate approach for our context, based on the greater number of learning strategies utilized by our students. The use of a written graphical record of the strengths and weaknesses in the analytical phase is recommended.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical simulation; debriefing; learning strategies; motivation; nursing

Year:  2021        PMID: 33525672      PMCID: PMC7911967          DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9020130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)        ISSN: 2227-9032


  9 in total

1.  Enhancing nursing knowledge using high-fidelity simulation.

Authors:  Michael G Gates; Mary Beth Parr; Janet E Hughen
Journal:  J Nurs Educ       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 1.726

2.  [Clinical Simulation and Emotional Learning].

Authors:  Adalberto Amaya Afanador
Journal:  Rev Colomb Psiquiatr       Date:  2014-05-10

Review 3.  The essentials of debriefing in simulation learning: a concept analysis.

Authors:  Kristina Thomas Dreifuerst
Journal:  Nurs Educ Perspect       Date:  2009 Mar-Apr

4.  Debriefing as formative assessment: closing performance gaps in medical education.

Authors:  Jenny W Rudolph; Robert Simon; Daniel B Raemer; Walter J Eppich
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2008-10-20       Impact factor: 3.451

Review 5.  The SBAR communication technique: teaching nursing students professional communication skills.

Authors:  Cynthia M Thomas; Evelyn Bertram; Doreen Johnson
Journal:  Nurse Educ       Date:  2009 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.082

6.  [Education and robotics. Medical simulation in paediatrics: a promising future].

Authors:  A Carrillo Alvarez; C Calvo Macías
Journal:  An Pediatr (Barc)       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.500

Review 7.  Debriefing methods and learning outcomes in simulation nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  JuHee Lee; Hyejung Lee; Sue Kim; Mona Choi; Il Sun Ko; JuYeon Bae; Sung Hae Kim
Journal:  Nurse Educ Today       Date:  2020-01-16       Impact factor: 3.442

8.  Equivalence testing of traditional and simulated clinical experiences: undergraduate nursing students' knowledge acquisition.

Authors:  Maura C Schlairet; Jane W Pollock
Journal:  J Nurs Educ       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 1.726

9.  States of curiosity modulate hippocampus-dependent learning via the dopaminergic circuit.

Authors:  Matthias J Gruber; Bernard D Gelman; Charan Ranganath
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 17.173

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.