Learning Conversations: An Analysis of the Theoretical Roots and Their Manifestations of Feedback and Debriefing in Medical Education

Feedback, learning and becoming: Narratives of feedback in complex performance challenges

INTRODUCTION

Becoming a general practitioner (or family medicine specialist) is challenging, as trainees learn to manage complex and ambiguous situations. Feedback is a key component of this learning. Although research has tended to focus on feedback's momentary processes and impacts, there is value in seeking to understand the work it does over time and how trainees position themselves across multiple feedback encounters. We ask: how do newly qualified GPs narrate themselves and their experiences with complex performance challenges? Within these narratives, what is the role of feedback?

METHODS

The research adopts a holistic and sequential narrative analysis approach, with in-depth narrative interviews of 16 general practice trainees who had just completed their training requirements. The analysis involved restorying the participant narratives chronologically. Each narrative formed a unit of analysis where narrative commonalities across plots, characters, emotions and the role of feedback were interpreted.

RESULTS

Four plotlines within GP trainees' stories of complex performance challenges were identified: Journeyperson, Hero's Quest, Solo Journeyer and Endless Struggle. Trainees, supervisors and feedback are positioned differently within these plotlines. Narratives were saturated with emotions.

DISCUSSION

The plotlines bring together an alternative way of understanding how feedback, learning and becoming are woven together. They illustrate how multiple interactions with patients, supervisors, peers and systems thread together into an overall trajectory. How a trainee positions themselves as protagonists and who they characterise as their antagonists can help direct the focus of supervisors' feedback conversations.

Structural Competency in Simulation-Based Health Professions Education: A Call to Action and Pragmatic Guide

SUMMARY STATEMENT

Simulation-based health professions educators can advance diversity, equity, and inclusion by cultivating structural competency, which is the trained ability to discern inequity not only at an individual level, but also at organizational, community, and societal levels. This commentary introduces Metzl and Hansen's Five-Step Model for structural competency and discusses its unique applicability to the metacognitive underpinnings of simulation-based health professions education. We offer a pragmatic guide for simulation-based health professions educators to collaboratively design learning objectives, simulation cases, character sketches, and debriefs in which structural competency is a simulation performance domain, alongside patient management, resource usage, leadership, situational awareness, teamwork, and/or communication. Our overall goal is to promote a paradigm shift in which educators are empowered to partner with patients, colleagues, and communities to recognize, learn about, and challenge the factors driving health inequities; a skill that may be applied to a broad range of health professions education within and outside of simulation.

Coffee and Cases (C&C) - Enhancing Knowledge Creation and Sharing for Organizational Learning From Clinical Debriefs in a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service: A Quality Improvement Study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this quality improvement (QI) study was to improve organizational learning from clinical debriefs known as "Coffee and Cases" (C&C) in a helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) by increasing weekly learning summaries (LS) and documented learning points (DLP) as well as the dissemination thereof by at least 50% from baseline.

METHODS

The problem analysis for sub-optimal organizational learning from C&C identified several factors, including lack of responsibility, poor documentation quality, and limited sharing of learning points. Using the Model for Improvement (MFI), interventions enhanced the learning environment, and improved documentation and dissemination. Changes included dedicated computers, introducing standardized processes, a newsletter, and a searchable DLP database. Statistical process control (SPC) charts were used to assess the effectiveness of interventions.

RESULTS

Prior to interventions (August 2022 to January 2023), baseline mean counts of weekly DLPs, LSs, DLPs internally disseminated, and DLPs openly disseminated were 3.18, 2.67, 3.18, and 2.96, respectively. Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles included declaring C&C as a non-clinical portfolio, redesigning documentation processes, initiating monthly newsletters, developing a DLP repository, and designing a C&C visual brand. Signals of special cause variation showed improvements, with mean counts increasing. Weekly DLPs increased to 14.92, LSs to 5.2, internally disseminated C&C Snippets to 11.88, and openly disseminated C&C Snippets to 8.64.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognizing barriers to effective knowledge creation and sharing, our QI study aimed to increase weekly DLPs and LSs by 50% from baseline. It aligned with the relationship between knowledge management and organizational learning, emphasizing the importance of utilizing knowledge for improved performance. Our interventions enhanced the learning environment, ensured robust capturing of learning points and effective communication thereof, ultimately contributing toward improving organizational dissemination of learning from clinical debriefs. Our QI study demonstrates how enhanced knowledge creation and sharing can widen the benefits of learning from clinical team debriefs.

Structured Debriefing to Assess Performance of Entrustable Professional Activities

Background The medical workplace presents challenges for workplace-based learning. Structured debriefing of shared clinical experiences has been proposed as a way to take advantage of workplace-based learning in a setting that facilitates deep learning conversations. Objective To investigate faculty and learner acceptance of private, face-to-face, structured debriefing of performance of entrustable professional activities (EPAs). Methods During the 2020-2021 academic year, faculty at the University of Colorado (CU) and the University of Utah (UU) debriefed fellow performance of jointly selected EPAs in neonatal-perinatal medicine pertinent to shared 1- to 3-week clinical rotations. Private face-to-face debriefing was structured by a comprehensive EPA-specific list of behavioral anchors describing 3 levels of entrustment/accomplishment. Sessions ended with joint decisions as to level of entrustment/accomplishment and goals for improvement. We used thematic analysis of semistructured fellow interviews and faculty focus groups to identify themes illustrated with representative quotations. Results We interviewed 17 fellows and 18 faculty. CU participants debriefed after clinical rotations; UU usually debriefed during rotations. Debriefing sessions for 1 to 2 EPAs lasted 20 to 40 minutes. Themes represented in fellow interviews and faculty focus groups suggested that debriefing facilitated formative feedback along with shared understanding of clinical performance and assessment criteria. The standardized format and private conversations supported assessment of aspects of performance for which review might otherwise have been overlooked or avoided. The conversations also provided valuable opportunities for formative discussion of other matters of importance to fellows. Conclusions Structured debriefing of recently shared clinical experiences fostered formative assessment viewed positively by teachers and learners.

Navigating discourses of feedback: developing a pattern system of feedback

Although feedback is often presented as if it were a well-understood concept in health professions education, in practice it can mean many things. For some, feedback is a conversation about defining and improving performance, while for others it is the information generated by assessments and tools. Indeed, feedback has variously been defined as a process, as data, as a conversation, and as a reflective exercise. As a result, for a concept so central to what educators do, 'feedback' is ambiguous and has multiple meanings. Pattern theory affords opportunities to examine what scholars and practitioners mean when they use the term 'feedback'. Elaborating feedback as a pattern system can connect otherwise disjointed discourses of feedback. In this paper, the authors describe the development of a pattern system of feedback in medical education. Arksey & O'Malley's 5-stages of scoping reviews were adapted to enact a 6-step pattern system development methodology that included (1) Identifying the research question and scope of inquiry; (2) elaborating a strategy for pattern identification; (3) study selection; (4) abductive pattern representation development; (5) pattern system testing; and (6) summarizing and reporting the results. A pattern system of feedback was developed based on review of 218 full text articles and testing against an additional 2833 citations. This pattern system is made up of 36 pattern representations organized under 6 domains: feedback referent, feedback intentions, feedback information, feedback processing, feedback response, and feedback meta. The pattern system was applied to two models of feedback to demonstrate its utility as a lens through which to analyze various instances of feedback and to foreshadow its potential broader applicability as a tool to facilitate knowledge synthesis in the feedback problem space.

Using simulation scenarios and a debriefing structure to promote feedback skills among interprofessional team members in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Team reflexivity and peer feedback in daily clinical work can improve patient safety. However, teams do not always engage in reflection after patient care. A reason could be that team members may lack skills in engaging in team reflection. This study explores the use of interprofessional team-based simulations to encourage and equip teams for reflective conversations in the real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This was a prospective, explorative study of team members' perceptions of the use of in situ simulation-based scenarios with critically ill patient cases to train team-based reflections and peer feedback. The study took place in two neurological wards. Prior to the intervention, a 1-day observation in each ward and semi-structured short interviews with physicians and nurses were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 94 staff members, 57 nurses, 8 nurse assistants and 29 physicians participated in the in situ simulation scenarios. All team members showed appreciation of the safe learning environment. The authors found that the simulations and the debriefing structure provided an opportunity for training of team reflexivity and feedback. The team members evaluated the simulation-based training very positively, and their initial reaction indicated that they found peer feedback useful for the individual and the team. This approach allowed them to reflect on their own clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The simulation-based training scenarios and the debriefing structure promoted team members' team reflexivity and peer feedback skills. The method is feasible and could be used in other specialties and situations. The team members' reactions to feedback were positive, and based on their reflections, there is a potential to increase both individual and team skills as well as improve patient treatment.

Use of different debriefing methods after in situ simulation with intensive care unit nurses

BACKGROUND

The debriefing phase is the simulation phase where performance improves and learning occurs.

AIM

This study examined the effects of the learning conversation (LC)-based, 3D (defusing, discovering and deepening) model-based and unstructured debriefing methods on satisfaction and debriefing experience after in-situ simulation among intensive care unit (ICU) nurses.

STUDY DESIGN

In this randomized controlled experimental study, three debriefing methods were compared, according to which 119 ICU nurses were divided into the following groups: LC group (n = 38), 3D group (n = 40) and control group (n = 41). In- situ simulation was performed with an intensive care patient scenario. p < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The total Debriefing Experience Scale-Experience with Debriefing part scores were 89.76 ± 8.10 in the LC group, 88.90 ± 8.70 in the 3D group and 88.29 ± 7.28 in the control group. No significant difference was found in debriefing experience and satisfaction between the groups (p > .05), but a significant difference was observed in the LC group. The groups showed a homogeneous distribution regarding participant characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Debriefing experience and satisfaction do not differ between the methods.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Implementation of the simulation in the ICU in - situ with ICU nurses is beneficial in obtaining a fidelity experience. Performing the debriefing application after simulation in line with the model supports the International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning (INACSL) debriefing standards.

Challenges in engaging patients in feedback conversations for health care professionals' workplace learning

INTRODUCTION

Patient feedback is relevant information for improvement of health care professionals' performance. Engaging patients in feedback conversations can help to harness patient feedback as a powerful tool for learning. However, health care settings may prevent patients and health care professionals to effectively engage in a feedback dialogue. To advance our understanding of how feedback conversations may support learning in and from practice, we sought to explore patients' and health care providers' perspectives on engaging patients in feedback conversations as informal learning opportunities.

METHODS

For this qualitative study, we used a pragmatic approach and conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 health care providers and 10 patient consultants. We applied an inductive approach to thematic analysis to understand interviewees' perceptions regarding patient feedback for workplace learning.

RESULTS

Participants attributed importance to patient feedback and described how the feedback may improve treatment relationships, professionals' performance and care processes on the team level and the organisational level. Participants experienced conflicting roles as patient and educator or expert and learner, respectively. Changing relationships, feelings of vulnerability and perceived power dynamics in treatment relationships would affect participants' engagement in feedback conversations. Patients and professionals alike saw a role for themselves in giving or inviting feedback but often missed the tools for engaging in feedback conversations.

DISCUSSION

Patient feedback can contribute to professionals' practice-based learning but requires navigating tensions around conflicting roles and power dynamics in the treatment relationship. Both patients and health care professionals need to embrace vulnerability and may need facilitation and guidance to use patient feedback effectively. Attention to power dynamics, if not a shift towards collaborative relationships, is however crucial to engage patients in feedback conversations, thereby capitalising the power patients posses.

What and when to debrief: a scoping review examining interprofessional clinical debriefing

INTRODUCTION

Clinical debriefing (CD) improves teamwork and patient care. It is implemented across a range of clinical contexts, but delivery and structure are variable. Furthermore, terminology to describe CD is also inconsistent and often ambiguous. This variability and the lack of clear terminology obstructs understanding and normalisation in practice. This review seeks to examine the contextual factors relating to different CD approaches with the aim to differentiate them to align with the needs of different clinical contexts.

METHODS

Articles describing CD were extracted from Medline, CINAHL, ERIC, PubMed, PsychINFO and Academic Search Complete. Empirical studies describing CD that involved two or more professions were eligible for inclusion. Included papers were charted and analysed using the Who-What-When-Where-Why-How model to examine contextual factors which were then used to develop categories of CD. Factors relating to what prompted debriefing and when debriefing occurred were used to differentiate CD approaches.

RESULTS

Forty-six papers were identified. CD was identified as either prompted or routine, and within these overarching categories debriefing was further differentiated by the timing of the debrief. Prompted CD was either immediate or delayed and routine CD was postoperative or end of shift. Some contextual factors were unique to each category while others were relatively heterogeneous. These categories help clarify the alignment between the context and the intention of CD.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed categories offer a practical way to examine and discuss CD which may inform decisions about implementation. By differentiating CD according to relevant contextual factors, these categories may reduce confusion which currently hinders discourse and implementation. The findings from this review promote context-specific language and a shift away from conceptions of CD that embody a one-size-fits-all approach.

Trainee-supervisor collaboration, progress-visualisation, and coaching: a survey on challenges in assessment of ICU trainees

BACKGROUND

Assessing trainees is crucial for development of their competence, yet it remains a challenging endeavour. Identifying contributing and influencing factors affecting this process is imperative for improvement.

METHODS

We surveyed residents, fellows, and intensivists working in an intensive care unit (ICU) at a large non-university hospital in Switzerland to investigate the challenges in assessing ICU trainees. Thematic analysis revealed three major themes.

RESULTS

Among 45 physicians, 37(82%) responded. The first theme identified is trainee-intensivist collaboration discontinuity. The limited duration of trainees' ICU rotations, large team size operating in a discordant three-shift system, and busy and unpredictable day-planning hinder sustained collaboration. Potential solutions include a concise pre-collaboration briefing, shared bedside care, and post-collaboration debriefing involving formative assessment and reflection on collaboration. The second theme is the lack of trainees' progress visualisation, which is caused by unsatisfactory familiarisation with the trainees' development. The lack of an overview of a trainee's previous achievements, activities, strengths, weaknesses, and goals may result in inappropriate assessments. Participants suggested implementing digital assessment tools, a competence committee, and dashboards to facilitate progress visualisation. The third theme we identified is insufficient coaching and feedback. Factors like personality traits, hierarchy, and competing interests can impede coaching, while high-quality feedback is essential for correct assessment. Skilled coaches can define short-term goals and may optimise trainee assessment by seeking feedback from multiple supervisors and assisting in both formative and summative assessment. Based on these three themes and the suggested solutions, we developed the acronym "ICU-STAR" representing a potentially powerful framework to enhance short-term trainee-supervisor collaboration in the workplace and to co-scaffold the principles of adequate assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

According to ICU physicians, trainee-supervisor collaboration discontinuity, the lack of visualisation of trainee's development, and insufficient coaching and feedback skills of supervisors are the major factors hampering trainees' assessment in the workplace. Based on suggestions by the survey participants, we propose the acronym "ICU-STAR" as a framework including briefing, shared bedside care, and debriefing of the trainee-supervisor collaboration at the workplace as its core components. With the attending intensivists acting as coaches, progress visualisation can be enhanced by actively collecting more data points.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

N/A.

Training simulated participants for role portrayal and feedback practices in communication skills training: A BEME scoping review: BEME Guide No. 86

BACKGROUND

Providing feedback is a key aspect of simulated participants' (SPs) educational work. In teaching contexts, the ability to provide feedback to learners is central to their role. Suboptimal feedback practices may deny learners the valuable feedback they need to learn and improve. This scoping review systematically maps the evidence related to SPs' role as educators and identifies how SPs prepare for their role and feedback practices.

METHODS

The authors conducted a scoping review and included a group of international stakeholders with experience and expertise in SP methodology. Five online databases were systematically searched and ERIC, MedEdPortal and MedEdPublish were hand searched to identify relevant studies. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were developed. Data screening and subsequently data charting were performed in pairs. The results of data charting were thematically analysed including categories relating to the Association of SP Educators (ASPE) Standards of Best Practice (SOBP).

RESULTS

From 8179 articles identified for the title and abstract screening, 98 studies were included. Studies reported the benefit of SPs' authentic role portrayal and feedback interactions for learners and on the reported learning outcomes. Data was heterogeneous with a notable lack of consistency in the detail regarding the scenario formats for communication skills training interventions, SP characteristics, and approaches to training for feedback and role portrayal.

CONCLUSIONS

The published literature has considerable heterogeneity in reporting how SPs are prepared for role portrayal and feedback interactions. Additionally, our work has identified gaps in the implementation of the ASPE SOBP, which promotes effective SP-learner feedback interactions. Further research is required to identify effective applications of SP methodology to prepare SPs for their role as educators.

On acknowledging silence within medical education

INTRODUCTION

Silence is a part of all interactions, yet its potential significance within medical education remains underexplored. Existing literature primarily focuses on its use as a skill, leaving a gap in understanding its broader implications. Emerging evidence from higher education suggests that conceptualising silence as a way of being and becoming could enrich personal and professional growth. Unfolding dialogue on equality, diversity and inclusion suggests that silence on inequity can be oppressive. However, medical education has yet to consider the possible implications of conceptualising silence in this way.

METHODS

We explore silence through the philosophical lens of acknowledgement. Acknowledgement-communicative behaviour that grants attention to others-is a philosophy with roots in phenomenology. It is concerned with being and becoming, and silence can be part of the communicative behaviour that constitutes acknowledgement. Our aim in exploring the ontological nature of silence (silence associated with being) using acknowledgement is to offer a springboard for practitioners, educators, and researchers to consider how silence is connected with our existence as people.

RESULTS

Positive acknowledgement involves a commitment to turning towards the other and valuing this connection. Silence can be a way of demonstrating this-for example, giving patients the space they need to express their thoughts and emotions. Negative acknowledgement is the opposite and involves dismissing, ignoring or invalidating another's experiences. In the context of silence, negative acknowledgement may involve ignoring a person or group's ideas, or bystander silence when witness to discrimination.

CONCLUSIONS

Within this work, we consider the ramifications of conceptualising silence as ontological, rather than purely a skill to be taught. This is a novel way of conceptualising silence, and there is a pressing need to explore this further to expand our understanding of the impact of silence for diverse groups of learners, educators, practitioners and patients.

"Rater training" re-imagined for work-based assessment in medical education

In this perspective, the authors critically examine "rater training" as it has been conceptualized and used in medical education. By "rater training," they mean the educational events intended to improve rater performance and contributions during assessment events. Historically, rater training programs have focused on modifying faculty behaviours to achieve psychometric ideals (e.g., reliability, inter-rater reliability, accuracy). The authors argue these ideals may now be poorly aligned with contemporary research informing work-based assessment, introducing a compatibility threat, with no clear direction on how to proceed. To address this issue, the authors provide a brief historical review of "rater training" and provide an analysis of the literature examining the effectiveness of rater training programs. They focus mainly on what has served to define effectiveness or improvements. They then draw on philosophical and conceptual shifts in assessment to demonstrate why the function, effectiveness aims, and structure of rater training requires reimagining. These include shifting competencies for assessors, viewing assessment as a complex cognitive task enacted in a social context, evolving views on biases, and reprioritizing which validity evidence should be most sought in medical education. The authors aim to advance the discussion on rater training by challenging implicit incompatibility issues and stimulating ways to overcome them. They propose that "rater training" (a moniker they suggest be reserved for strong psychometric aims) be augmented with "assessor readiness" programs that link to contemporary assessment science and enact the principle of compatibility between that science and ways of engaging with advances in real-world faculty-learner contexts.

If we assess, will they learn? Students' perspectives on the complexities of assessment-for-learning

Introduction

Assessment can positively influence learning, however designing effective assessment-for-learning interventions has proved challenging. We implemented a mandatory assessment-for-learning system comprising a workplace-based assessment of non-medical expert competencies and a progress test in undergraduate medical education and evaluated its impact.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured interviews with year-3 and 4 medical students at McGill University to explore how the assessment system had influenced their learning in year 3. We conducted theory-informed thematic analysis of the data.

Results

Eleven students participated, revealing that the assessment influenced learning through several mechanisms. Some required little student engagement (i.e., feed-up, test-enhanced learning, looking things up after an exam). Others required substantial engagement (e.g., studying for tests, selecting raters for quality feedback, using feedback). Student engagement was moderated by the perceived credibility of the system and of the costs and benefits of engagement. Credibility was shaped by students' goals-in-context: becoming a good doctor, contributing to the healthcare team, succeeding in assessments.

Discussion

Our assessment system failed to engage students enough to leverage its full potential. We discuss the inherent flaws and external factors that hindered student engagement. Assessment designers should leverage easy-to-control mechanisms to support assessment-for-learning and anticipate significant collaborative work to modify learning cultures.

Evolution of the feedback conversation in anaesthesia education: a narrative review

Over the past century, education has been a core component for improving patient safety. The initial focus was developing a curriculum and an assessment process. In recent decades, the value of work-based learning has come to the fore. Learning from work, or experiential learning, requires reflection, which is critically dependent on external feedback. Conceptions of feedback have moved from a transactional information transfer from the supervisor to the trainee to a learner-centred and collaborative process occurring in a complex socio-cultural environment. In this narrative review we describe the evolution of the feedback conversation, provide a model synthesising the core concepts of feedback, and offer some guidance for the development of effective feedback in anaesthesia education.

Simulation-Based Education for Enhancing Obstetric Emergency Response: A Needs Impact Evaluation

Simulation is an ideal method for procedural training in obstetrics. To maximise training opportunities through simulation, the evaluation of these educational activities should be based on a standardised evidence-based approach. As such, the tools used in the evaluative process should be validated for content and context, as this ensures consistency of approach. It also makes the findings and recommendations acceptable, applicable and credible. More so, the information can be used for planning further learning, assessment of the competency of the trainers and educational governance purposes. In our view, simulation should be used in conjunction with other forms of procedural assessment such as mini-clinical examinations and case-based discussions to translate skills to actual life events. The learners will be able to further consolidate their learning, improve professional skills and feel involved throughout the programme.

Transforming Professional Identity in Simulation Debriefing: A Systematic Metaethnographic Synthesis of the Simulation Literature

SUMMARY STATEMENT

There continues to be a lack of detailed understanding of how debriefing works and how it enables learning. To further our understanding and simultaneously illuminate current knowledge, a metaethnographic qualitative synthesis was undertaken to address the research question: how are interactions in simulation debriefing related to participant learning? Ten databases were searched (up to November 2020) and 17 articles were selected for inclusion.Initial interpretive synthesis generated 37 new concepts that were further synthesized to produce a new theoretical framework. At the heart of the framework is a concept of reflective work, where participants and faculty recontextualize the simulation experience bidirectionally with clinical reality: a process that facilitates sensemaking. This occurs in a learning milieu where activities such as storytelling, performance evaluation, perspective sharing, agenda setting, and video use are undertaken. The outcome is conceptualization of new future roles, clinical competence, and professional language development-a process of transforming professional identity.

Optimizing the Learner's Role in Feedback: Development of a Feedback-Preparedness Online Application for Medical Students in the Clinical Setting

Feedback is an essential component of medical education, especially during clinical rotations. There is growing interest in learner-related factors that can optimize feedback's efficiency, including goal orientation, reflection, self-assessment, and emotional response. However, no mobile application or curriculum currently exists to specifically address those factors. This technical report describes the concept, design, and learner-based feedback of an innovative online application, available on mobile phones, developed to bridge this gap. Eighteen students in their third or fourth year of medical school provided comments on a pilot version of the application. The majority of learners deemed the module relevant, interesting, and helpful to guide reflection and self-assessment, therefore fostering better preparation before an upcoming feedback session. Minor improvements were suggested in terms of content and format. The learners' initial positive response supports further efforts to engage in validity and evaluation research. Future steps include modifying the mobile application based on learners' comments, evaluating its efficacy in a real clinical setting, and clarifying whether it is most beneficial for mid-rotation or end-of-rotation feedback sessions.

The resident experience with psychological safety during interprofessional critical event debriefings

Objectives

Interprofessional feedback and teamwork skills training are important in graduate medical education. Critical event debriefing is a unique interprofessional team training opportunity in the emergency department. While potentially educational, these varied, high-stakes events can threaten psychological safety for learners. This is a qualitative study of emergency medicine resident physicians' experience of interprofessional feedback during critical event debriefing to characterize factors that impact their psychological safety.

Methods

The authors conduced semistructured interviews with resident physicians who were the physician team leader during a critical event debriefing. Interviews were coded and themes were generated using a general inductive approach and concepts from social ecological theory.

Results

Eight residents were interviewed. The findings suggest that cultivating a safe learning environment for residents during debriefings involves the following: (1) allowing space for validating statements, (2) supporting strong interprofessional relationships, (3) providing structured opportunities for interprofessional learning, (4) encouraging attendings to model vulnerability, (5) standardizing the process of debriefing, (6) rejecting unprofessional behavior, and (7) creating the time and space for the process in the workplace.

Conclusions

Given the numerous intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional factors at play, educators should be sensitive to times when a resident cannot engage due to unaddressed threats to their psychological safety. Educators can address these threats in real time and over the course of a resident's training to enhance psychological safety and the potential educational impact of critical event debriefing.

Factors of Engagement in Synchronous Online Learning Conversations and Distance Debriefing: A Realist Synthesis Review

SUMMARY STATEMENT

The COVID-19 pandemic propelled remote simulation and online distance debriefings. Like in-person debriefings, faculty seek to facilitate effective reflective discourse. The online learning environment, however, presents challenges to learner engagement that differ considerably from in-person debriefing, yet little research exists in this area. In an effort to identify factors that influence debriefing engagement in the online environment, we conceptualized distance debriefings as complex social interactions and performed a realist review of the literature for evidence in the fields of online learning, healthcare simulation, instructional design, and other teaching and learning fields to see whether we might discern factors that influence engagement in online learning conversations that might inform online distance debriefing best practices. Eighteen articles were found through our search of 5 online databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, Google Scholar). We conducted iterative purposeful searching and continued to do so throughout the review to try to identify any additional studies that would contribute to our understanding. A thematic analysis of the findings of our included articles revealed indicators categorized using the community of inquiry framework, enabling us to understand and explain them in the context of online learning and propose their application to distance debriefing engagement. We also propose a new dimension to the framework: internal and external factors of engagement. Our findings demonstrate that online learning can positively influence engagement of learners if essential factors are implemented. These factors may inform recommendations for best practices toward learner engagement during healthcare simulation distance debriefing.

A phenomenology of direct observation in residency: Is Miller's 'does' level observable?

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines on direct observation (DO) present DO as an assessment of Miller's 'does' level, that is, the learner's ability to function independently in clinical situations. The literature, however, indicates that residents may behave 'inauthentically' when observed. To minimise this 'observer effect', learners are encouraged to 'do what they would normally do' so that they can receive feedback on their actual work behaviour. Recent phenomenological research on patients' experiences with DO challenges this approach; patients needed-and caused-some participation of the observing supervisor. Although guidelines advise supervisors to minimise their presence, we are poorly informed on how some deliberate supervisor participation affects residents' experience in DO situations. Therefore, we investigated what residents essentially experienced in DO situations.

METHODS

We performed an interpretive phenomenological interview study, including six general practice (GP) residents. We collected and analysed our data, using the four phenomenological lenses of lived body, lived space, lived time and lived relationship. We grouped our open codes by interpreting what they revealed about common structures of residents' pre-reflective experiences.

RESULTS

Residents experienced the observing supervisor not just as an observer or assessor. They also experienced them as both a senior colleague and as the patient's familiar GP, which led to many additional interactions. When residents tried to act as if the supervisor was not there, they could feel insecure and handicapped because the supervisor was there, changing the situation.

DISCUSSION

Our results indicate that the 'observer effect' is much more material than was previously understood. Consequently, observing residents' 'authentic' behaviour at Miller's 'does' level, as if the supervisor was not there, seems impossible and a misleading concept: misleading, because it may frustrate residents and cause supervisors to neglect patients' and residents' needs in DO situations. We suggest that one-way DO is better replaced by bi-directional DO in working-and-learning-together sessions.

Assessment of Clinical Reasoning While Attending Critical Care Postsimulation Reflective Learning Conversation: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The critical care environment is characterized with a high level of workload, complexity, and risk of committing practice mistakes. To avoid clinical errors, health care professionals should be competent with effective clinical reasoning skills. To develop effective clinical reasoning skills, health care professionals should get the chance to practice and be exposed to different patient experiences. To minimize safety risks to patients and health care professionals, clinical reasoning with a focus on reflective learning conversation opportunities can be practiced in simulated settings.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the most valid and reliable tools to assess clinical reasoning while attending adult critical care-related simulation-based courses in which reflective learning conversations are used.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted following Joanna Briggs Institute and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews Extension for Scoping Reviews. Eight electronic databases were searched, and full-text review was completed for 26 articles.

RESULTS

The search resulted in no studies conducted to measure clinical reasoning while attending adult critical care-related, simulation-based courses in which the reflective learning conversation method was embedded.

DISCUSSION

This highlights the need to evaluate current available clinical reasoning tools or develop new tools within the context of adult critical care simulation where reflective learning forms a key part of the simulation procedures.

'For the most part it works': Exploring how authors navigate peer review feedback

BACKGROUND

Peer review aims to provide meaningful feedback to research authors so that they may improve their work, and yet it constitutes a particularly challenging context for the exchange of feedback. We explore how research authors navigate the process of interpreting and responding to peer review feedback, in order to elaborate how feedback functions when some of the conditions thought to be necessary for it to be effective are not met.

METHODS

Using constructivist grounded theory methodology, we interviewed 17 recently published health professions education researchers about their experiences with the peer review process. Data collection and analysis were concurrent and iterative. We used constant comparison to identify themes and to develop a conceptual model of how feedback functions in this setting.

RESULTS

Although participants expressed faith in peer review, they acknowledged that the process was emotionally trying and raised concerns about its consistency and credibility. These potential threats were mitigated by factors including time, team support, experience and the exercise of autonomy. Additionally, the perceived engagement of reviewers and the cultural norms and expectations surrounding the process strengthened authors' willingness and capacity to respond productively. Our analysis suggests a model of feedback within which its perceived usefulness turns on the balance of threats and countermeasures.

CONCLUSIONS

Feedback is a balancing act. Although threats to the productive uptake of peer review feedback abound, these threats may be neutralised by a range of countermeasures. Among these, opportunities for autonomy and cultural normalisation of both the professional responsibility to engage with feedback and the challenge of doing so may be especially influential and may have implications beyond the peer review setting.

Debriefing or Feedback: Exploring the Impact of Two Post-Scenario Discussion Methods in the Acquisition and Retention of Non-Technical Skills

INTRODUCTION

There is a paucity of quantitative studies objectively comparing debriefing and feedback as methods for post-scenario discussion and its impact on healthcare teams' acquisition and retention of non-technical skills. The main purpose of this study is to provide some insight on this research question, using a sample of medical students. A secondary objective explores students' opinion and preference on the post-scenario discussion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty-five medical students were distributed among 15 teams, and randomly allocated to two groups. Each team participated in three different simulated scenarios, with similar levels of difficulty and opportunities to apply specific non-technical skills: leadership, communication, and task management. To assess the acquisition and retention of skills, scenarios occurred on days one (baseline), two (acquisition) and 20 (retention). Team performance was objectively evaluated by an observer, using scenario recordings. Students individually assessed different aspects of debriefing and feedback.

RESULTS

Both debriefing and feedback groups showed similar overall increase in objective scores, with significant increase between days one and two (acquisition), and a smaller increase between days two and 20 (retention). Students indicated debriefing as the preferred discussion method.

CONCLUSION

Debriefing and feedback are effective post-scenario discussion methods, promoting acquisition and retention of non-technical skills, by undergraduate students. Allying debriefing reflexive practice with feedback directive style, and shifting appropriately between facilitation and instruction, can be a good compromise to achieve a timely and educationally meaningful discussion.

A Qualitative Study to Understand the Cultural Factors That Influence Clinical Data Use for Continuing Professional Development

INTRODUCTION

The use of data to inform lifelong learning has become increasingly important in continuing professional development (CPD) practice. Despite the potential benefits of data-driven learning, our understanding of how physicians engage in data-informed learning activities, particularly for CPD, remains unclear and warrants further study. The purpose of this study was to explore how physicians perceive cultural factors (individual, organizational, and systemic) that influence the use of clinical data to inform lifelong learning and self-initiated CPD activities.

METHODS

This qualitative study is part of an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study examining data-informed learning. Participants were psychiatrists and general surgeons from Canada and the United States. Recruitment occurred between April 2019 and November 2019, and the authors conducted semistructured telephone interviews between May 2019 and November 2019. The authors performed thematic analysis using an iterative, inductive method of constant comparative analysis.

RESULTS

The authors interviewed 28 physicians: 17 psychiatrists (61%) and 11 general surgeons (39%). Three major themes emerged from the continuous, iterative analysis of interview transcripts: (1) a strong relationship between data and trust, (2) a team-based approach to data-informed learning for practice improvement, and (3) a need for organizational support and advocacy to put data into practice.

CONCLUSION

Building trust, taking a team-based approach, and engaging multiple stakeholders, such as data specialists and organizational leadership, may significantly improve the use of data-informed learning. The results are situated in the existing literature, and opportunities for future research are summarized.

Using the Assessment of Reasoning Tool to facilitate feedback about diagnostic reasoning

OBJECTIVES

Idiosyncratic approaches to reasoning among teachers and limited reliable workplace-based assessment and feedback methods make teaching diagnostic reasoning challenging. The Assessment of Reasoning Tool (ART) was developed to fill this gap, but its utility and feasibility in providing feedback to residents has not been studied. We evaluated how the ART was used to assess, teach, and guide feedback on diagnostic reasoning to pediatric interns.

METHODS

We used an integrated mixed-methods approach to evaluate how the ART facilitates the feedback process between clinical teachers and learners. We collected data from surveys of pediatric interns and interviews of hospital medicine faculty at Baylor College of Medicine from 2019 to 2020. Interns completed the survey each time they received feedback from their attending that was guided by the ART. The preliminary intern survey results informed the faculty interview questions. We integrated descriptive statistics of the survey with the thematic analysis of the transcribed interviews.

RESULTS

Survey data (52 survey responses from 38 interns) and transcribed interviews (10 faculty) were analyzed. The ART framework provided a shared mental model which facilitated a feedback conversation. The ART-guided feedback was highly rated in terms of structure, content, and clarity in goal-setting while enabling new learning opportunities. Barriers to using the ART included limited time and inter-faculty variability of its use.

CONCLUSIONS

The ART facilitated effective and feasible faculty feedback to interns on their diagnostic reasoning skills.

The influence of psychological safety on feedback conversations in general practice training

INTRODUCTION

Fostering trainee psychological safety is increasingly being recognised as necessary for effective feedback conversations. Emerging literature has explored psychological safety in peer learning, formal feedback and simulation debrief. Yet, the conditions required for psychologically safe feedback conversations in clinical contexts, and the subsequent effects on feedback, have not been explored.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study using interviews and longitudinal audio-diaries with 12 rural general practice trainees. The data were analysed using framework thematic analysis to identify factors across the data and as individual participant case studies with illustrative vignettes of dynamic interleaving of factors in judgements about feedback conversations.

FINDINGS

Findings identify the influence of intrapersonal (e.g. confidence and comfort to seek help), interpersonal (e.g. trust and relationship) and sociocultural factors (e.g. living and working in a rural community) that contribute to psychological safety in the context of everyday feedback conversations. Multiple factors interplayed in feedback conversations where registrars could feel safe and unsafe within one location and even at the one time.

DISCUSSION

Participants felt psychologically safe to engage their educators in sanctioned systems of conversation related to the immediate care of the patient and yet unsafe to engage in less patient related performance conversations despite the presence of multiple positive interpersonal factors. The concept of a safe 'container' (contained space) is perhaps idealised when it comes to feedback conversations about performance in the informal and emergent spaces of postgraduate training. More research is needed into understanding how clinical environments can sanction feedback conversations in clinical environments.

Only When They Seek: Exploring Supervisor and Resident Perspectives and Positions on Upward Feedback

INTRODUCTION

Verbal feedback from trainees to supervisors is rare in medical education, although valuable for improvement in teaching skills. Research has mostly examined narrative comments on resident evaluations of their supervisors. This study aimed to explore supervisors' and residents' beliefs and experiences with upward feedback, along with recommendations to initiate and facilitate effective conversations.

METHODS

Using 60-minute focus group discussions, a previous study explored opinions of internal medicine residents and clinical supervisors at the Brigham and Women's Hospital regarding the impact of institutional culture on feedback conversations. For this study, we conducted a thematic analysis of the transcribed, anonymous data to identify key concepts pertaining only to verbal upward feedback, through the theoretical lens of Positioning theory.

RESULTS

Twenty-two supervisors and 29 residents participated in three and five focus groups, respectively. Identified themes were mapped to three research questions regarding (1) existing beliefs (lack of impact, risks to giving supervisors feedback, need for preparation and reflection), (2) experiences (nonspecific language, avoidance of upward feedback, bypassing the supervisor), and (3) recommended approaches (setting clear expectations, seeking specific feedback, emphasizing interest in growth).

DISCUSSION

Study participants appeared to assume learner-teacher positions during feedback conversations, resulting in residents' concerns of adverse consequences, beliefs that supervisors will neither accept feedback nor change their behaviors, and avoidance of constructive upward feedback. Residents suggested that emphasis on mutual professional growth and regular feedback seeking by supervisors could encourage them to take on the role of feedback providers. Their recommendations could be a valuable starting point for faculty development initiatives on upward feedback.

„Die Puppe hat Luftnot“ – Simulation zum interprofessionellen Lernen im Team: aber sinnvoll!

Ausbildungskonzepte, die eine Simulation von Fällen und Szenarien aller Art nutzen, haben breiten Eingang in Curricula und Praxis gefunden. Ein Vertrauen in technische Simulationsmethoden ohne qualifizierte Ausbildung in der Methode kann schaden. Deswegen sollte nach der Auswahl der korrekten Simulationsmethode großer Wert auf die Durchführung der Simulation gelegt werden. Neben einem strukturierten Design der simulierten Szenarien und der korrekten technischen Durchführung ist für den Lernerfolg vor allem das Debriefing, die Nachbesprechung, entscheidend. Prüfungen mit Simulation als Methode sind nur zu empfehlen, wenn sie von Trainings getrennt durchgeführt werden und die Bewertung nach transparenten, validierten Kriterien erfolgt.

Does direct observation influence the quality of workplace-based assessment documentation?

Background

A key component of competency-based medical education (CBME) is direct observation of trainees. Direct observation has been emphasized as integral to workplace-based assessment (WBA) yet previously identified challenges may limit its successful implementation. Given these challenges, it is imperative to fully understand the value of direct observation within a CBME program of assessment. Specifically, it is not known whether the quality of WBA documentation is influenced by observation type (direct or indirect).

Methods

The objective of this study was to determine the influence of observation type (direct or indirect) on quality of entrustable professional activity (EPA) assessment documentation within a CBME program. EPA assessments were scored by four raters using the Quality of Assessment for Learning (QuAL) instrument, a previously published three-item quantitative measure of the quality of written comments associated with a single clinical performance score. An analysis of variance was performed to compare mean QuAL scores among the direct and indirect observation groups. The reliability of the QuAL instrument for EPA assessments was calculated using a generalizability analysis.

Results

A total of 244 EPA assessments (122 direct observation, 122 indirect observation) were rated for quality using the QuAL instrument. No difference in mean QuAL score was identified between the direct and indirect observation groups (p = 0.17). The reliability of the QuAL instrument for EPA assessments was 0.84.

Conclusions

Observation type (direct or indirect) did not influence the quality of EPA assessment documentation. This finding raises the question of how direct and indirect observation truly differ and the implications for meta-raters such as competence committees responsible for making judgments related to trainee promotion.

Simulation translation differences between craft groups

Background

Many simulation-based clinical education events (SBCEE) aim to prepare healthcare professionals with the knowledge, skills, and features of professionalism needed to deliver quality patient care. However, how these SBCEE learnings are translated into broader workplace practices by learners from different craft groups has not been described.

Objectives

To understand how learners from different craft groups (doctors and nurses) anticipate simulation-based learnings will translate to their workplaces and the process by which translation occurs.

Design

Qualitative descriptive study design using pre- and post-SBCEE questionnaires.

Settings

A large tertiary Australian hospital-based simulation centre that facilitates SBCEE for multi-professional graduate and undergraduate clinicians from 16 hospitals.

Methods

Participants who attended SBCEEs between May and October 2021 completed questionnaires at two touchpoints, on the day of attending a SBCEE and 6 weeks after. Based on a phenomenological approach, the study examined clinicians’ experiences in relation to simulation education, intended simulation learning use in the workplace, and perceived success in subsequently using these learnings to improve clinical outcomes. Qualitative inductive thematic data analysis was used to develop narratives for different learner cohorts.

Results

Three overarching themes were identified regarding simulation participants’ perceptions of the success of translating simulation learnings into the workplace. These were: scenario-workplace mirroring, self-assessment, and successful confidence. Doctor participants found it difficult to map SBCEE learnings to their workplace environments if they did not mirror those used in simulation. Nurses sought peer evaluation to analyse the effectiveness of their workplace translations, whereas doctors relied on self-assessment. Learners from both craft groups highly prized ‘confidence-building’ as a key indicator of improved workplace performance achieved through SBCEE learning.

Conclusion

A diverse range of factors influences healthcare workers’ experiences in translating simulation learnings to their workplace. To equip simulation learners to translate learnings from a SBCEE into their clinical practices, we suggest the following areas of focus: co-development of translation plans with learners during the delivery of an SBCEE including the indicators of success, above table discussions on the generalisability of learnings to different environments and contexts, smart investment in simulation outputs, and cautious championing of confidence-building.

“Debriefing and Organizational Lessons Learned” (DOLL): A Qualitative Study to Develop a Classification Framework for Reporting Clinical Debriefing Results

Background

The COVID-19 crisis has radically affected our healthcare institutions. Debriefings in clinical settings provide a time for the clinicians to reflect on the successes (pluses) and difficulties (deltas) encountered. Debriefings tend to be well-received if included in the broader management of the unit. The goal of this study was to develop a framework to categorize these debriefings and to assess its worthiness.

Methods

A qualitative approach based on a grounded theory research method was adopted resulting in the “Debriefing and Organizational Lessons Learned” (DOLL) framework. Debriefings were conducted within two Emergency Departments of a Belgian University Hospital during an 8-week period. In the first step, three researchers used debriefing transcripts to inductively develop a tentative framework. During the second step, these three researchers conducted independent categorizations of the debriefings using the developed framework. In step 3, the team analyzed the data to understand the utility of the framework. Chi-square was conducted to examine the associations between the item types (pluses and deltas) and the framework's dimensions.

Results

The DOLL is composed of seven dimensions and 13 subdimensions. Applied to 163 debriefings, the model identified 339 items, including 97 pluses and 242 deltas. Results revealed that there was an association between the frequency of pluses and deltas and the dimensions (p &lt; 0.001). The deltas were mainly related to the work environment (equipment and maintenance) (p &lt; 0.001) while the pluses identified tended to be related to the organization of the unit (communication and roles) (p &lt; 0.001). With leadership's support and subsequent actions, clinicians were more enthusiastic about participating and the researchers anecdotally detected a switch toward a more positive organizational learning approach.

Conclusion

The framework increases the potential value of clinical debriefings because it organizes results into actionable areas. Indeed, leadership found the DOLL to be a useful management tool. Further research is needed to investigate how DOLL may work in non-crisis circumstances and further apply the DOLL into incident reporting and risk management process of the unit.

Immediate faculty feedback using debriefing timing data and conversational diagrams

BACKGROUND

Debriefing is an essential skill for simulation educators and feedback for debriefers is recognised as important in progression to mastery. Existing assessment tools, such as the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH), may assist in rating performance but their utility is limited by subjectivity and complexity. Use of quantitative data measurements for feedback has been shown to improve performance of clinicians but has not been studied as a focus for debriefer feedback.

METHODS

A multi-centre sample of interdisciplinary debriefings was observed. Total debriefing time, length of individual contributions and demographics were recorded. DASH scores from simulation participants, debriefers and supervising faculty were collected after each event. Conversational diagrams were drawn in real-time by supervising faculty using an approach described by Dieckmann. For each debriefing, the data points listed above were compiled on a single page and then used as a focus for feedback to the debriefer.

RESULTS

Twelve debriefings were included (µ = 6.5 simulation participants per event). Debriefers receiving feedback from supervising faculty were physicians or nurses with a range of experience (n = 7). In 9/12 cases the ratio of debriefer to simulation participant contribution length was ≧ 1:1. The diagrams for these debriefings typically resembled a fan-shape. Debriefings (n = 3) with a ratio < 1:1 received higher DASH ratings compared with the ≧ 1:1 group (p = 0.038). These debriefings generated star-shaped diagrams. Debriefer self-rated DASH scores (µ = 5.08/7.0) were lower than simulation participant scores (µ = 6.50/7.0). The differences reached statistical significance for all 6 DASH elements. Debriefers evaluated the 'usefulness' of feedback and rated it 'highly' (µ= 4.6/5).

CONCLUSION

Basic quantitative data measures collected during debriefings may represent a useful focus for immediate debriefer feedback in a healthcare simulation setting.

Exploring the role of power during debriefing of interprofessional simulations

Interprofessional simulation aims to improve teamwork and patient care by bringing participants from multiple professions together to practice simulated patient care scenarios. Yet, power dynamics may influence interprofessional learning during simulation, which typically occurs during the debriefing. This issue has received limited attention to date but may explain why communication breakdowns and conflicts among healthcare teams persist despite widespread adoption of interprofessional simulation. This study explores the role of power during interprofessional simulation debriefings. We collected data through observations of seven interprofessional simulation sessions and debriefings, four focus groups with simulation participants, and four interviews with simulation facilitators. We identified ways in which power dynamics influenced discussions during debriefing and sometimes limited participants' willingness to share feedback and speak up. We also found that issues related to power that arose during interprofessional simulations often went unacknowledged during the debriefing, leaving healthcare professionals unprepared to navigate power discrepancies with other members of healthcare teams in practice. Given that the goal of interprofessional simulation is to allow professionals to learn together about each other, explicitly addressing power in debriefing after interprofessional simulation may enhance learning.

How to train thoracic anesthesia for residents and consultants?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The training of anesthesiologists in thoracic surgery is a significant challenge. International professional societies usually provide only a case number-based or time-based training concept. There are only a few concepts of simulation trainings in thoracic anesthesia and interprofessional debriefings on a daily basis are rarely applied. In this review, we will show how professional curricula should aim for competence rather than number of cases and why simulation-based training and debriefing should be implemented.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent curricula recommend so-called entrustable professional activities (EPAs)as a way out of the dilemma between the number of cases vs. competence. With these EPAs, competence can be mapped and prerequisites defined.Training concepts from simulation in healthcare have so far not explicitly reached anesthesia for thoracic surgery. In addition to mere technical training, combined technical-behavioral training forms have proven to be an effective training targeting the entire team in the context of the actual working environment in the operating theatre.

SUMMARY

Interdisciplinary and interprofessional learning can take place in simulation trainings and on a daily basis through postevent debriefings. When these debriefings are conducted in a structured way, an improvement in the performance of the entire team can be the result. The basis for these debriefings - as well as for other training approaches - is psychological safety, which should be established and maintained together with all professions involved.

Autonomy and developing physicians: Reimagining supervision using self-determination theory

In this article, we address the question, 'What is the role of autonomy in physician development?' Medical education is a developmental process, and autonomy plays a motivational role in physician development. Calls for increased supervision of residents have raised concerns that the resulting decreased autonomy might interfere with resident development, leading the authors to explore the relationship between supervision and autonomy. The medical education literature posits a simple inverse relationship between supervision and autonomy. Within competency frameworks, autonomy is operationalised as independence and viewed as the end goal of training. Alternatively, there is emerging empirical literature describing autonomy and supervision as dynamic and developmental constructs and point towards more complex relationship between supervision and autonomy. Self-determination theory (SDT) presents a framework for understanding this dynamic relationship and the role of autonomy in physician development. Within SDT, autonomy is a fundamental psychological need, associated with motivation for learning, self-regulation and an internal locus of control. Supporting learner autonomy can afford learners the opportunity to internalise the values and norms of the profession, leading to an integrated regulation of their behaviours and actions. Conceptualising autonomy through the lens of SDT provides an avenue for education interventions and future research on supervision and autonomy. Educators can integrate supervision and autonomy support in the clinical setting, seeking to motivate learner development by balancing optimal challenge and support and integrating autonomy support with 'hands-on' approaches to supervision. SDT also provides a theoretical framework relevant to current discussions regarding feedback conversations and coaching in medical education. Lastly, conceptualising autonomy using SDT opens new avenues for investigation, exploring the complex relationship between supervision and autonomy and developing efforts to integrate autonomy support with clinical supervision.

Co-constructive Patient Simulation: A Learner-Centered Method to Enhance Communication and Reflection Skills

INTRODUCTION

In simulation sessions using standardized patients (SPs), it is the instructors, rather than the learners, who traditionally identify learning goals. We describe co-constructive patient simulation (CCPS), an experiential method in which learners address self-identified goals.

METHODS

In CCPS, a designated learner creates a case script based on a challenging clinical encounter. The script is then shared with an actor who is experienced working as an SP in medical settings. An instructor with experience in the model is involved in creating, editing, and practicing role play of the case. After co-creation of the case, learners with no prior knowledge of the case (peers or a supervisor) interview the SP. The clinical encounter is followed by a group debriefing session.

RESULTS

We conducted 6 CCPS sessions with senior trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry. Topics that are difficult to openly talk about may be especially appropriate for the CCPS model-without overt guidance or solicitation, the scripts developed by learners for this series involved: medical errors and error disclosure; racial tensions, including overt racism; interprofessional conflict; transphobia; patient-on-provider violence; sexual health; and the sharing of vulnerability and personal imperfections in the clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-constructive patient simulation provides an alternative multistage and multimodal approach to traditional SP simulation sessions that can adapt iteratively and in real time to new clinical vicissitudes and challenges This learner-centered model holds promise to enrich simulation-based education by fostering autonomous, meaningful, and relevant experiences that are in alignment with trainees' self-identified learning goals.

Bidirectional learning opportunities: How GP-supervisors and trainees exchange knowledge

INTRODUCTION

Workplace-based learning conversations can be a good opportunity for supervisors and trainees to learn from each other. When both professionals discuss their specific knowledge openly with each other, learning conversations may be a useful educational tool, for instance for learning how to apply evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the workplace. We do, however, need a better understanding of how the exchange of knowledge provides opportunities for such bidirectional learning. The aim of this study was therefore to analyse how trainees and supervisors currently handle bidirectional learning opportunities by describing in detail how supervisors respond to knowledge expressed by trainees during a learning conversation.

METHOD

We video-recorded learning conversations between supervisors and trainees in general practice (GP). Within these learning conversations, EBM discussions on medical topics were selected and transcribed. We then identified, analysed using Conversation Analysis (CA) and categorised each expression of knowledge by the trainee and the supervisor's subsequent response.

RESULTS

We found that when a trainee expresses knowledge during the learning conversation, supervisors either (a) refute the expressed knowledge, (b) immediately suggest an alternative or (c) pose (additional) questions. These responses have consequences for the learning opportunities of both trainee and supervisor: it is only when supervisors pose further questions that trainees are encouraged to elaborate on their knowledge, leading to a bidirectional learning opportunity.

DISCUSSION

Improving EBM learning opportunities for both supervisors and trainees requires more than simply instructing trainees to express knowledge-based-for instance-on recent evidence more often. Inflexible institutional roles related to historical claims of supervisors' epistemic authority hamper bidirectional learning. Posing open questions during learning conversations enhances the flexibility of institutional roles while also creating bidirectional learning opportunities.

How Teachers Adapt Their Cognitive Strategies When Using Entrustment Scales

PURPOSE

Rater cognition is a field of study focused on individual cognitive processes used by medical teachers when completing assessments. Much has been written about the role of rater cognition in the use of traditional assessment scales. Entrustment scales (ES) are becoming the tool of choice for workplace-based assessments. It is not known how moving to an entrustment framework may cause teachers to adapt their cognitive rating strategies. This study aimed to explore this gap by asking teachers to describe their thinking when making rating decisions using a validated ES.

METHOD

Using purposive sampling, family medicine teachers supervising obstetrical care were invited to participate in cognitive interviews. Teachers were interviewed between December 2018 and March 2019 using retrospective verbal protocol analysis. They were asked to describe their experiences of rating residents in the last 6 months using new ES. Constructivist grounded theory guided data collection and analysis. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed iteratively. A constant comparative approach was used to code and analyze the data until consensus was reached regarding emerging themes.

RESULTS

There was variability in how teachers used the ES. Faculty describe several ways in which they ultimately navigated the tool to say what they wanted to say. Four key themes emerged: (1) teachers interpreted the anchors differently based on their cognitive framework, (2) teachers differed in how they were able to cognitively shift away from traditional rating scales, (3) teachers struggled to limit assessments to a report on observed behavior, and (4) teachers contextualized their ratings.

CONCLUSIONS

Variability in teachers' interpretation of learner performance persists in entrustment frameworks. Rater's individual cognitive strategies and how they observe, process, and integrate their thoughts into assessments form part of a rich picture of learner progress. These insights can be harnessed to contribute to decisions regarding readiness for unsupervised practice.

Approaches to interpersonal conflict in simulation debriefings: A qualitative study

CONTEXT

Conflict during simulation debriefing can interfere with learning when psychological safety is threatened. Debriefers often feel unprepared to address conflict between learners and the literature does not provide evidence-based guidance within the simulation setting. The purpose of this study was to describe debriefers' approach to mediating interpersonal conflict and explore when, why and how they adopt mediation strategies.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of qualitative data collected as part of a larger study examining simulation debriefers' approaches to debriefing scenarios with different learner characteristics. For this study, we applied thematic analysis to transcripts from simulated debriefings (n = 10) and the associated pre-simulation (n = 11) and post-simulation (n = 10) interviews that focused on interpersonal conflict between learners.

RESULTS

Debriefers described struggling with mediating conflict and the importance of self-awareness. Specific mediation strategies included intervening, addressing power relations, reconciling unproductive differences, leveraging different perspectives, circumventing the conflict, and shifting beyond the conflict; each of these strategies encompassed a number of particular skills. Situations that triggered a mediation approach were related to psychological safety, emotional intensity, and opportunities for shared understanding and productive learning. Debriefers applied mediation strategies and skills in a flexible and creative way.

CONCLUSIONS

The strategies we have described for mediating interpersonal conflict between learners in simulation debriefing align with notions of psychological safety and may be useful in guiding future professional development for simulation educators.

Clinical debriefing during the COVID-19 pandemic: hurdles and opportunities for healthcare teams

The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent pressures on healthcare staff and resources have exacerbated the need for clinical teams to reflect and learn from workplace experiences. Surges in critically ill patients, the impact of the disease on the workforce and long term adjustments in work and life have upturned our normality. Whilst this situation has generated a new 'connectedness' within healthcare workers, it also continues to test our resilience.An international multi-professional collaboration has guided the identification of ongoing difficulties to effective communication and debriefing, as well as emerging opportunities to promote a culture of dialogue. This article outlines pandemic related barriers and new possibilities categorising them according to task management, teamwork, situational awareness and decision making. It describes their direct and indirect impact on clinical debriefing and signposts towards solutions to overcome challenges and, building on new bridges, advance team conversations that allow us to learn, improve and support each other.This pandemic has brought clinical professionals together; nevertheless, it is essential to invest in further developing and supporting cohesive teams. Debriefing enables healthcare teams and educators to mitigate stress, build resilience and promote a culture of continuous learning and patient care improvement.

Learning Conversations with Trainees: An Undervalued but Useful EBM Learning Opportunity for Clinical Supervisors

Phenomenon: Supervisors and trainees can learn skills related to evidence-based medicine from each other in the workplace by collaborating and interacting, in this way benefiting from each other's strengths. This study explores supervisors' perceptions of how they currently learn evidence-based medicine by engaging in learning conversations with their trainee. Approach: Semi-structured, video-stimulated elicitation interviews were held with twenty-two Dutch and Belgian supervisors in general practice. Supervisors were shown fragments of their video-recorded learning conversations, allowing them to reflect. Recorded interviews were analyzed using a grounded theory-based approach.Findings: Supervisors did not immediately perceive workplace learning conversations as an opportunity to learn evidence-based medicine from their trainee. They mostly saw these conversations as a learning opportunity for trainees and a chance to maintain the quality of care within their practice. Nevertheless, during the interviews, supervisors did acknowledge that learning conversations help them to gain up-to-date knowledge and search skills or more awareness of their own knowledge or gaps in their knowledge. Not identified as a learning outcome was how to apply evidence-based medicine within a clinical practice by combining evidence with clinical expertise and the patient's preferences. Insights: Supervisors acknowledge that they learn elements of the three aspects of evidence-based medicine by having learning conversations with their trainee, but they currently see this as secondary to the trainee's learning process. Emphasizing opportunities for bidirectional learning could improve learning of evidence-based medicine during workplace learning conversations.

Twelve tips for learners to succeed in a CBME program

The international movement to competency-based medical education (CBME) marks a major transition in medical education that requires a shift in educators' and learners' approach to clinical experiences, the way assessment data are collected and integrated, and in learners' mindsets. Learners entering a CBME curriculum must actively drive their learning experiences and education goals. For some, this expectation may be a significant change from their previous approach to learning in medicine. This paper highlights 12 tips to help learners succeed within a CBME model.

Numbers Encapsulate, Words Elaborate: Toward the Best Use of Comments for Assessment and Feedback on Entrustment Ratings

The adoption of entrustment ratings in medical education is based on a seemingly simple premise: to align workplace-based supervision with resident assessment. Yet it has been difficult to operationalize this concept. Entrustment rating forms combine numeric scales with comments and are embedded in a programmatic assessment framework, which encourages the collection of a large quantity of data. The implicit assumption that more is better has led to an untamable volume of data that competency committees must grapple with. In this article, the authors explore the roles of numbers and words on entrustment rating forms, focusing on the intended and optimal use(s) of each, with a focus on the words. They also unpack the problematic issue of dual-purposing words for both assessment and feedback. Words have enormous potential to elaborate, to contextualize, and to instruct; to realize this potential, educators must be crystal clear about their use. The authors set forth a number of possible ways to reconcile these tensions by more explicitly aligning words to purpose. For example, educators could focus written comments solely on assessment; create assessment encounters distinct from feedback encounters; or use different words collected from the same encounter to serve distinct feedback and assessment purposes. Finally, the authors address the tyranny of documentation created by programmatic assessment and urge caution in yielding to the temptation to reduce words to numbers to make them manageable. Instead, they encourage educators to preserve some educational encounters purely for feedback, and to consider that not all words need to become data.

Twelve tips for facilitating and implementing clinical debriefing programmes

Contemporary clinical practice places a high demand on healthcare workforces due to complexity and rapid evolution of guidelines. We need embedded workplace practices such as clinical debriefing (CD) to support everyday learning and patient care. Debriefing, defined as a 'guided reflective learning conversation', is most often undertaken in small groups following simulation-based experiences. However, emerging evidence suggests that debriefing may also enhance learning in clinical environments where facilitators need to simultaneously balance psychological safety, learning goals and emotional well-being. This twelve tips article summarises international experience collated at the recent Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE) debriefing symposium. These tips encompass the benefits of CD, as well as suggested approach to facilitation. Successful CD programmes are frequently team focussed, interdisciplinary, implemented in stages and use a clear structure.

"A debriefer must be neutral" and other debriefing myths: a systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to identify taken-for-granted beliefs and assumptions about use, costs, and facilitation of post-event debriefing. These myths prevent the ubiquitous uptake of post-event debriefing in clinical units, and therefore the identification of process, teamwork, and latent safety threats that lead to medical error. By naming these false barriers and assumptions, the authors believe that clinical event debriefing can be implemented more broadly.

METHODS

We interviewed an international sample of 37 clinicians, educators, scholars, researchers, and healthcare administrators from hospitals, universities, and healthcare organizations in Western Europe and the USA, who had a broad range of debriefing experience. We adopted a systemic-constructivist approach that aimed at exploring in-depth assumptions about debriefing beyond obvious constraints such as time and logistics and focused on interpersonal relationships within organizations. Using circular questions, we intended to uncover new and tacit knowledge about barriers and facilitators of regular clinical debriefings. All interviews were transcribed and analyzed following a comprehensive process of inductive open coding.

RESULTS

In total, 1508.62 min of interviews (25 h, 9 min, and 2 s) were analyzed, and 1591 answers were categorized. Many implicit debriefing theories reflected current scientific evidence, particularly with respect to debriefing value and topics, the complexity and difficulty of facilitation, the importance of structuring the debriefing and engaging in reflective practice to advance debriefing skills. We also identified four debriefing myths which may prevent post-event debriefing from being implemented in clinical units.

CONCLUSION

The debriefing myths include (1) debriefing only when disaster strikes, (2) debriefing is a luxury, (3) senior clinicians should determine debriefing content, and (4) debriefers must be neutral and nonjudgmental. These myths offer valuable insights into why current debriefing practices are ad hoc and not embedded into daily unit practices. They may help ignite a renewed momentum into the implementation of post-event debriefing in clinical settings.