Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40229870›Full record

ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2025

Open-access healthcare debriefing videos need to incorporate more Safety-II learnings.

Suzanne Bentley, Alexander Meshel, Komal Bajaj

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Suzanne BentleyNew York City Health + Hospitals/Elmhurst, Elmhurst, USA. Bentleys@nychhc.org.
Alexander MeshelIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.
Komal BajajNew York City Health + Hospitals/Jacobi, Bronx, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient safety science and debriefing approaches have historically tended to focus most heavily on Safety-I or "why things go wrong" and learning from unfavorable performance, root cause of adverse outcomes, and improvement opportunities learned from failures. Consequently, rich opportunities for analysis and learning from "why things go right," successful performance, and exploration of how systems succeed, adapt, and perform effectively regardless of outcome-Safety-II-are often underrepresented.

methodsOpen-access videos of healthcare debriefing were sought by searching Google and YouTube via search terms "healthcare debriefing," "healthcare debrief," "healthcare debriefing video," "healthcare debrief video," "healthcare debriefing example," "healthcare debrief example," "simulation debriefing," and "simulation debrief." Additionally, a search of major professional organization websites was utilized. Included videos were reviewed to score all utterances on the following: (1) phase of debriefing; (2) question or statement; (3) by facilitator or participant; (4) if utterance was neutral, related to positive performance/ "what went well" or negative performance/"what could be improved"; (5) if facilitator utterance was general or a follow-up, reflective utterance building upon previous discussion; (6) if participant utterances were general or specific reflective, insight offering comments; (7) all facilitator follow-up/ specific reflective type utterances were further analyzed and coded as exploration into Safety-I (e.g., exploration of why error occurred) or Safety-II (e.g., adaptability, variation, reproducing success) concepts.

resultsA review of open-access video examples of healthcare debriefing demonstrates disproportionate emphasis on Safety-I and highlights the opportunity for open-access examples of healthcare debriefing to include additional language and techniques that promote and role model inclusion of Safety-II discussion.

conclusionsWhile there is always room for improvement and we must all strive to do the best we can, we are missing a major opportunity to build resilience by Safety-II exploration into analyzing why things go positively. Those designing such instructional videos should intentionally include debriefing focused on both Safety-I and Safety-II aspects of performance, regardless of outcome, as they are both important, complimentary, and result in a more holistic understanding of improvement opportunities and success. Future study on the impact of Safety-II debriefing should focus on context-specific promotion of quality and patient safety, as well as impact on participant wellbeing and overall safety culture.

Indexed as

DebriefingSafetySafety-IISimulation

Identifiers

PMID40229870
PMCPMC11995573

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.