Transforming Debriefing By Exploring Faculty Preparation and Use with the Debriefing for Meaningful Learning Inventory

Sunday, 30 July 2017: 9:10 AM

Cynthia Sherraden Bradley, PhD, RN, CNE, CHSE
Department of Nursing, University of Central Missouri, Lee's Summit, MO, USA

Purpose:  The purpose of this study was to look at the relationship between training received in debriefing using an evidence based debriefing method and the application of that training into educational practice. Debriefing is the most significant component of simulation, and faculty report varied ways of receiving training (Waznonis, 2015) yet the impact of debriefer training on how a debriefing method is applied has not been reported. Although training of debriefers in the use of a structured debriefing method is recommended by regulating bodies and international nursing organizations following the methods used in the NCSBN National Simulation Study (Alexander et al., 2015; Jeffries, Dreifuerst, Kardong-Edgren & Hayden, 2015), a description of its impact on the understanding and application of debriefing is unknown.

An evidence-based debriefing method adopted widely across nursing curricula is Debriefing for Meaningful Learning©(DML). DML promotes the development of clinical reasoning among nursing students, yet little is known regarding how debriefers trained in this method use it, or the resulting impact on nursing knowledge and practice (Dreifuerst, 2015).

Methods:  To measure the understanding and application of the central concepts of DML, the DML Inventory (DMLI) was developed using the Debriefing for Meaningful Learning Evaluation Scale (Author & Dreifuerst, 2016) and psychometrically tested for validity. The DMLI was then used to quantify the debriefing behaviors of 234 debriefers during simulation debriefing with baccalaureate nursing students.

Results:  Statistically significant differences were found between debriefers in their understanding and application of DML, based on the training sources received. The DMLI data revealed that DML trained debriefers consistently apply DML behaviors after receiving training, and application increased in consistency with multiple training sources. Statistically significant interactions were found between groups in the application of DML and understanding of the central concepts of the method.

Conclusion:  This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge of debriefing and provides a tested instrument to be used for assessing debriefers using DML. The findings demonstrate the impact of the type of training on how structured debriefing methods are implemented, which could improve future debriefing training for simulation and clinical experiences. This session will include a description of the development, testing, and use of the DMLI and an interactive discussion of implications from these findings for transforming nursing knowledge, education and practice globally.