How to debrief teamwork interactions: using circular questions to explore and change team interaction patterns

A systematic scoping review of group reflection in medical education

BACKGROUND

Reviewing experiences and recognizing the impact of personal and professional views and emotions upon conduct shapes a physician's professional and personal development, molding their professional identity formation (PIF). Poor appreciation on the role of reflection, shortages in trained tutors and inadequate 'protected time' for reflections in packed medical curricula has hindered its integration into medical education. Group reflection could be a viable alternative to individual reflections; however, this nascent practice requires further study.

METHODS

A Systematic Evidence Based Approach guided Systematic Scoping Review (SSR in SEBA) was adopted to guide and structure a review of group reflections in medical education. Independent searches of articles published between 1st January 2000 and 30th June 2022 in bibliographic and grey literature databases were carried out. Included articles were analysed separately using thematic and content analysis, and combined into categories and themes. The themes/categories created were compared with the tabulated summaries of included articles to create domains that framed the synthesis of the discussion.

RESULTS

1141 abstracts were reviewed, 193 full-text articles were appraised and 66 articles were included and the domains identified were theories; indications; types; structure; and benefits and challenges of group reflections.

CONCLUSIONS

Scaffolded by current approaches to individual reflections and theories and inculcated with nuanced adaptations from other medical practices, this SSR in SEBA suggests that structured group reflections may fill current gaps in training. However, design and assessment of the evidence-based structuring of group reflections proposed here must be the focus of future study.

Helping healthcare teams to debrief effectively: associations of debriefers' actions and participants' reflections during team debriefings

BACKGROUND

Debriefings help teams learn quickly and treat patients safely. However, many clinicians and educators report to struggle with leading debriefings. Little empirical knowledge on optimal debriefing processes is available. The aim of the study was to evaluate the potential of specific types of debriefer communication to trigger participants' reflection in debriefings.

METHODS

In this prospective observational, microanalytic interaction analysis study, we observed clinicians while they participated in healthcare team debriefings following three high-risk anaesthetic scenarios during simulation-based team training. Using the video-recorded debriefings and INTERACT coding software, we applied timed, event-based coding with DE-CODE, a coding scheme for assessing debriefing interactions. We used lag sequential analysis to explore the relationship between what debriefers and participants said. We hypothesised that combining advocacy (ie, stating an observation followed by an opinion) with an open-ended question would be associated with participants' verbalisation of a mental model as a particular form of reflection.

RESULTS

The 50 debriefings with overall 114 participants had a mean duration of 49.35 min (SD=8.89 min) and included 18 486 behavioural transitions. We detected significant behavioural linkages from debriefers' observation to debriefers' opinion (z=9.85, p<0.001), from opinion to debriefers' open-ended question (z=9.52, p<0.001) and from open-ended question to participants' mental model (z=7.41, p<0.001), supporting our hypothesis. Furthermore, participants shared mental models after debriefers paraphrased their statements and asked specific questions but not after debriefers appreciated their actions without asking any follow-up questions. Participants also triggered reflection among themselves, particularly by sharing personal anecdotes.

CONCLUSION

When debriefers pair their observations and opinions with open-ended questions, paraphrase participants' statements and ask specific questions, they help participants reflect during debriefings.

Guiding, Intermediating, Facilitating, and Teaching (GIFT): A Conceptual Framework for Simulation Educator Roles in Healthcare Debriefing

INTRODUCTION

Use of frameworks for simulation debriefing represents best practice, although available frameworks provide only general guidance. Debriefers may experience difficulties implementing broad recommendations, especially in challenging debriefing situations that require more specific strategies. This study describes how debriefers approach challenges in postsimulation debriefing.

METHODS

Ten experienced simulation educators participated in 3 simulated debriefings. Think-aloud interviews before and after the simulations were used to explore roles that debriefers adopted and the associated strategies they used to achieve specific goals. All data were audio recorded and transcribed, and a constructivist grounded theory approach was used for analysis.

RESULTS

4 roles in debriefing were identified: guiding, (inter)mediating, facilitating integration, and teaching. Each role was associated with specific goals and strategies that were adopted to achieve these goals. The goal of creating and maintaining a psychologically safe learning environment was common across all roles. These findings were conceptualized as the GIFT debriefing framework.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the multiple roles debriefers play and how these roles are enacted in postsimulation debriefing. These results may inform future professional development and mentorship programs for debriefing in both simulation-based education and healthcare settings.

„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.

Communication content during debriefing in simulation-based medical education: An analytic framework and mixed-methods analysis

BACKGROUND

Debriefing is an indispensable component of simulation-based medical education, and it has great potential for contributions to reflective learning. Little is known about the relevance of communication during debriefings. We developed a category framework to assess the communication content of debriefings, which we used to analyze possible relationships to participant learning outcomes.

METHOD

We deductively and inductively developed a category framework for qualitative content analysis of debriefings. We coded 20 debriefings using this framework, and correlated debriefing frequency with learning outcomes (i.e. engagement, satisfaction, individual and team learning success).

RESULTS

The category framework comprised 9 main and 81 subcategories (48 debriefers, 27 participants, 6 simulated patients), which yielded good intercoder agreement. Debriefers and participants communicated equally using mostly advocacy, inquiry, illustration, and confirmation. Debriefer questions and participant inputs were positively related to learning outcomes. In contrast, guess-what-I-am-thinking, apologies, observations, use of materials, participant descriptions, simple repetition of statements, and evaluation by other participants were not positively associated with learning outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study provides important new information about communication content during debriefings. The association between communication content and learning outcomes appears particularly relevant to further enhance efficacy of debriefings and simulation-based medical education.

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.

Debriefing: A Tool to Enhance Education and Practice in NICU

Debriefing, a facilitator-guided reflection of an educational experience or critical incident, is an important tool in improving the safety and quality of practice in the NICU. Unlike feedback, which is often a one-way discussion, debriefing is a purposeful, 2-way reflective discussion which is based on experiential learning theory. The purpose of this article is to review the theoretical basis of debriefing and describe styles and tools for debriefing that can be applied in the NICU.

Embracing informed learner self-assessment during debriefing: the art of plus-delta

The healthcare simulation field has no shortage of debriefing options. Some demand considerable skill which serves as a barrier to more widespread implementation. The plus-delta approach to debriefing offers the advantages of conceptual simplicity and ease of implementation. Importantly, plus-delta promotes learners' capacity for a self-assessment, a skill vital for safe clinical practice and yet a notorious deficiency in professional practice. The plus-delta approach confers the benefits of promoting uptake of debriefing in time-limited settings by educators with both fundamental but also advanced skills, and enhancing essential capacity for critical self-assessment informed by objective performance feedback. In this paper, we describe the role of plus-delta in debriefing, provide guidance for incorporating informed learner self-assessment into debriefings, and highlight four opportunities for improving the art of the plus delta: (a) exploring the big picture vs. specific performance issues, (b) choosing between single vs. double-barreled questions, (c) unpacking positive performance, and (d) managing perception mismatches.

Fundamental underpinnings of simulation education: describing a four-component instructional design approach to healthcare simulation fellowships

Although in 2020, there are more than 120 healthcare simulation fellowships established globally, there is a paucity of literature on how to design fellowship programs most effectively, to equip graduates with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of a competent simulation educator. Offering a systematic structure to approach simulation fellowship programmatic design may aid in better achieving program goals. In this manuscript, we present the application of the 4-component instructional design model as a blueprint to the development of Simulation Education Fellowships. We offer examples used at the NYC Health + Hospitals simulation fellowship to illustrate how the 4-component model informs fellowship program design which promotes the development of a simulation educator. This manuscript will provide a roadmap to designing curricula and assessment practices including self-reflective logbooks to focus the path toward achieving desired skills and shape future conversations around programmatic development.

"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.

Sim for Life: Foundations-A Simulation Educator Training Course to Improve Debriefing Quality in a Low Resource Setting: A Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Despite the importance of debriefing, little is known about the effectiveness of training programs designed to teach debriefing skills. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of a faculty development program for new simulation educators at Mbarara University of Science and Technology in Uganda, Africa.

METHODS

Healthcare professionals were recruited to attend a 2-day simulation educator faculty development course (Sim for Life: Foundations), covering principles of scenario design, scenario execution, prebriefing, and debriefing. Debriefing strategies were contextualized to local culture and focused on debriefing structure, conversational strategies, and learner centeredness. A debriefing worksheet was used to support debriefing practice. Trained simulation educators taught simulation sessions for 12 months. Debriefings were videotaped before and after initial training and before and after 1-day refresher training at 12 months. The quality of debriefing was measured at each time point using the Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD) tool by trained, calibrated, and blinded raters.

RESULTS

A total of 13 participants were recruited to the study. The mean (95% confidence interval) OSAD scores pretraining, posttraining, and at 12 months before and after refresher were 18.2 (14.3-22.1), 26.7 (22.8-30.6), 25.5 (21.2-29.9), and 27.0 (22.4-31.6), respectively. There was a significant improvement from pretraining to posttraining (P < 0.001), with no significant decay from posttraining to 12 months (P = 0.54). There was no significant difference in OSAD scores pre- versus post-refresher training at 12 months (P = 0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

The Sim for Life Foundations program significantly improves debriefing skills with retention of debriefing skills at 12 months.

A practical guide to virtual debriefings: communities of inquiry perspective

Many simulation programs have recently shifted towards providing remote simulations with virtual debriefings. Virtual debriefings involve educators facilitating conversations through web-based videoconferencing platforms. Facilitating debriefings through a computer interface introduces a unique set of challenges. Educators require practical guidance to support meaningful virtual learning in the transition from in-person to virtual debriefings. The communities of inquiry conceptual framework offer a useful structure to organize practical guidance for conducting virtual debriefings. The communities of inquiry framework describe the three key elements-social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence-all of which contribute to the overall learning experience. In this paper, we (1) define the CoI framework and describe its three core elements, (2) highlight how virtual debriefings align with CoI, (3) anticipate barriers to effective virtual debriefings, and (4) share practical strategies to overcome these hurdles.

Understanding Debriefing: A Qualitative Study of Event Reconstruction at an Academic Medical Center

PURPOSE

This qualitative study sought to characterize the role of debriefing after real critical events among anesthesia residents at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.

METHOD

From October 2016 to June 2017 and February to April 2018, the authors conducted 25 semistructured interviews with 24 anesthesia residents after they were involved in 25 unique critical events. Interviews focused on the experience of the event and the interactions that occurred thereafter. A codebook was generated through annotation, then used by 3 researchers in an iterative process to code interview transcripts. An explanatory model was developed using an abductive approach.

RESULTS

In the aftermath of events, residents underwent a multistage process by which the nature of critical events and the role of residents in them were continuously reconstructed. Debriefing-if it occurred-was 1 stage in this process, which also included stages of internal dialogue, event documentation, and lessons learned. Negotiated in each stage were residents' culpability, reputation, and the appropriateness of their affective response to events.

CONCLUSIONS

Debriefing is one of several stages of interaction that occur after a critical event; all stages play a role in shaping how the event is interpreted and remembered. Because of its dynamic role in constituting the nature of events and residents' role in them, debriefing can be a high-stakes interaction for residents, which can contribute to their reluctance to engage in it. The function and quality of debriefing can be assessed in more insightful fashion by understanding its relation to the other stages of event reconstruction.

Laborious but Elaborate: The Benefits of Really Studying Team Dynamics

In this manuscript we discuss the consequences of methodological choices when studying team processes "in the wild." We chose teams in healthcare as the application because teamwork cannot only save lives but the processes constituting effective teamwork in healthcare are prototypical for teamwork as they range from decision-making (e.g., in multidisciplinary decision-making boards in cancer care) to leadership and coordination (e.g., in fast-paced, acute-care settings in trauma, surgery and anesthesia) to reflection and learning (e.g., in post-event clinical debriefings). We draw upon recently emphasized critique that much empirical team research has focused on describing team states rather than investigating how team processes dynamically unfurl over time and how these dynamics predict team outcomes. This focus on statics instead of dynamics limits the gain of applicable knowledge on team functioning in organizations. We first describe three examples from healthcare that reflect the importance, scope, and challenges of teamwork: multidisciplinary decision-making boards, fast-paced, acute care settings, and post-event clinical team debriefings. Second, we put the methodological approaches of how teamwork in these representative examples has mostly been studied centerstage (i.e., using mainly surveys, database reviews, and rating tools) and highlight how the resulting findings provide only limited insights into the actual team processes and the quality thereof, leaving little room for identifying and targeting success factors. Third, we discuss how methodical approaches that take dynamics into account (i.e., event- and time-based behavior observation and micro-level coding, social sensor-based measurement) would contribute to the science of teams by providing actionable knowledge about interaction processes of successful teamwork.

Twelve tips for integrating team reflexivity into your simulation-based team training

Due to increasing complexity in healthcare, clinicians must often make decisions under uncertain conditions in which teams must be flexible and process emerging information "on the fly" in order to adapt to changing circumstances. A crucial strategy that helps teams to adapt, learn, and develop is team reflexivity (TR) - a team's ability to collectively reflect on group objectives, strategies, processes, and outcomes of past and current performance and to adapt accordingly. We provide 12 evidence-based tips on incorporating TR into simulation-based team training (SBTT). The first three points elaborate on basic principles of TR, when TR can take place and why it matters. The following nine tips are then organized according to three phases in which teams are able to engage in TR: pre-action, in-action, and post-action. SBTT represents an ideal venue to train various TR behaviors that foster team learning and improve patient care.

What’s the headline on your mind right now? How reflection guides simulation-based faculty development in a master class

Introduction

The demand for highly skilled simulation-based healthcare educators (SBEs) is growing. SBEs charged with developing other SBEs need to be able to model and conduct high-quality feedback conversations and ‘debrief the debriefing’. Direct, non-threatening feedback is one of the strongest predictors of improved performance in health professions education. However, it is a difficult skill to develop. Developing SBEs who can coach and support other SBEs is an important part of the faculty development pipeline. Yet we know little about how they get better at skilled feedback and the ability to reflect on it. There is scant evidence about their thoughts, feelings and dilemmas about this advanced learning process. To address this gap, we examined advanced SBE’s subjective experience as they grappled with challenges in a 4-day advanced SBE course. Their reflections will help target faculty development efforts.

Methods

Using a repeated, identical free-writing task, we asked “What is the headline for what is on your mind right now?”

Results

A five-theme mosaic of self-guiding reflections emerged: (1) metacognitions about one’s learning process, (2) evaluations of sessions or tools, (3) notes to self, (4) anticipations of applying the new skills in the future, and (5) tolerating the tension between pleasant and unpleasant emotions.

Conclusions

The results extend simulation-based education science by advocating the motivational role of noting inconsistencies between one’s intention and impact and the central role of self-regulation, emotion, and experiencing feedback and debriefing from multiple perspectives for improving advanced skills of SBEs. Recommendations for faculty development are discussed.

Differences in talking-to-the-room behaviour between novice and expert teams during simulated paediatric resuscitation: a quasi-experimental study

Background

Team coordination represents an important factor for clinical performance. Research in this area suggests that not only behaviour frequencies but also patterns of team coordination constitute a central aspect of teamwork. However, little is known about potential differences in coordination patterns between novice teams (ie, teams of inexperienced members) and expert teams (ie, teams of experienced members). The current study addresses this gap by investigating the use of talking-to-the-room—an important implicit coordination behaviour—in novice teams versus expert teams.

Aim

To illustrate differences in coordination behaviour between novice and expert teams. This will provide important knowledge for simulation-based training.

Methods

The study was conducted in the context of two resuscitation training courses (introductory course and refresher course) for staff members at a children’s hospital. Volunteers from both courses participated in the study. They were randomly assigned to 16 teams each consisting of one physician and two nurses. The study used a quasi-experimental design with two conditions (novice vs expert). Participants of the introductory course were assigned to the novice condition (eight teams), and participants of the refresher course were assigned to the expert condition (eight teams). All teams completed the same standardised paediatric resuscitation scenario. They were videotaped during the simulation, and team coordination behaviour was coded using Co-ACT.

Results

Lag-sequential analysis of 1902 distinct coordination acts revealed that novice teams and expert teams differed significantly in their coordination behaviour. Expert teams were characterised by patterns in which implicit coordination behaviour (ie, talking to the room) was followed by further implicit coordination behaviour and not followed by explicit coordination behaviour (ie, instructions), whereas the reverse was found for novice teams.

Conclusion

The current study highlights role of coordination patterns for understanding teamwork in healthcare and provides important insights for team training.

DE-CODE: a coding scheme for assessing debriefing interactions

Debriefings are crucial for learning during simulation-based training (SBT). Although the quality of debriefings is very important for SBT, few studies have examined actual debriefing conversations. Investigating debriefing conversations is important for identifying typical debriefer–learner interaction patterns, obtaining insights into associations between debriefers’ communication and learners’ reflection and comparing different debriefing approaches. We aim at contributing to the science of debriefings by developing DE-CODE, a valid and reliable coding scheme for assessing debriefers’ and learners’ communication in debriefings. It is applicable for both direct, on-site observations and video-based coding.

Methods

The coding scheme was developed both deductively and inductively from literature on team learning and debriefing and observing debriefings during SBT, respectively. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using Cohen’s kappa. DE-CODE was tested for both live and video-based coding.

Results

DE-CODE consists of 32 codes for debriefers’ communication and 15 codes for learners’ communication. For live coding, coders achieved good inter-rater reliabilities with the exception of four codes for debriefers’ communication and two codes for learners’ communication. For video-based coding, coders achieved substantial inter-rater reliabilities with the exception of five codes for debriefers’ communication and three codes for learners’ communication.

Conclusion

DE-CODE is designed as micro-level measurement tool for coding debriefing conversations applicable to any debriefing of SBT in any field (except for the code medical input). It is reliable for direct, on-site observations as well as for video-based coding. DE-CODE is intended to allow for obtaining insights into what works and what does not work during debriefings and contribute to the science of debriefing.