Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31914989›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2020

Training and evaluating simulation debriefers in low-resource settings: lessons learned from Bihar, India.

Julia H Raney, Melissa M Medvedev, Susanna R Cohen, Hilary Spindler, Rakesh Ghosh, Amelia Christmas, Aritra Das, Aboli Gore, Tanmay Mahapatra, Dilys Walker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Julia H RaneyDepartment of Pediatrics, Stanford University, 725 Welch Rd, MC: 5906, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA. Jhraney@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8579-9744
Melissa M MedvedevDepartment of Pediatrics, University of California San Francisco, 550 16th Street, Box 1224, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Susanna R CohenCollege of Nursing, University of Utah, 10 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Hilary SpindlerGlobal Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Rakesh GhoshGlobal Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.
Amelia ChristmasPRONTO International, State RMNCH+A Unit, C-16 Krishi Nagar, A.G. Colony, Patna, Bihar, 80002, India.
Aritra DasCare India Solutions for Sustainable Development, 14 Patliputra Colony, Patna, Bihar, 800013, India.
Aboli GoreCare India Solutions for Sustainable Development, 14 Patliputra Colony, Patna, Bihar, 800013, India.
Tanmay MahapatraCare India Solutions for Sustainable Development, 14 Patliputra Colony, Patna, Bihar, 800013, India.
Dilys WalkerGlobal Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, 550 16th St, San Francisco, CA, 94158, USA.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation OPP1112431
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo develop effective and sustainable simulation training programs in low-resource settings, it is critical that facilitators are thoroughly trained in debriefing, a critical component of simulation learning. However, large knowledge gaps exist regarding the best way to train and evaluate debrief facilitators in low-resource settings.

methodsUsing a mixed methods approach, this study explored the feasibility of evaluating the debriefing skills of nurse mentors in Bihar, India. Videos of obstetric and neonatal post-simulation debriefs were assessed using two known tools: the Center for Advanced Pediatric and Perinatal Education (CAPE) tool and Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH). Video data was used to evaluate interrater reliability and changes in debriefing performance over time. Additionally, twenty semi-structured interviews with nurse mentors explored perceived barriers and enablers of debriefing in Bihar.

resultsA total of 73 debriefing videos, averaging 18 min each, were analyzed by two raters. The CAPE tool demonstrated higher interrater reliability than the DASH; 13 of 16 CAPE indicators and two of six DASH indicators were judged reliable (ICC > 0.6 or kappa > 0.40). All indicators remained stable or improved over time. The number of 'instructors questions,' the amount of 'trainee responses,' and the ability to 'organize the debrief' improved significantly over time (p < 0.01, p < 0.01, p = 0.04). Barriers included fear of making mistakes, time constraints, and technical challenges. Enablers included creating a safe learning environment, using contextually appropriate debriefing strategies, and team building. Overall, nurse mentors believed that debriefing was a vital aspect of simulation-based training.

conclusionSimulation debriefing and evaluation was feasible among nurse mentors in Bihar. Results demonstrated that the CAPE demonstrated higher interrater reliability than the DASH and that nurse mentors were able to maintain or improve their debriefing skills overtime. Further, debriefing was considered to be critical to the success of the simulation training. However, fear of making mistakes and logistical challenges must be addressed to maximize learning. Teamwork, adaptability, and building a safe learning environment enhanced the quality enhanced the quality of simulation-based training, which could ultimately help to improve maternal and neonatal health outcomes in Bihar.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceSimulation TrainingCommunicationFeasibility StudiesHumansIndiaMentorsNeonatal NursingObstetric NursingReproducibility of ResultsBarriers.Debrief.Enablers.India.Low-resource.Simulation

Identifiers

PMID31914989
PMCPMC6951007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.