Skip to main content

Abstract

Debriefing describes a process to elicit information pertaining to an experienced event from the event’s participants in order to gain a better understanding of it. Debriefing is widely used in many fields as both an educational tool to augment learning and a potentially therapeutic tool after traumatic events. Debriefing works best when a structured, but flexible, approach is used to facilitate the debriefing session.

Novice learners in simulation will often benefit from a skilled debriefer or “facilitator” who can guide the learner through the debriefing process. These facilitators often function more as a coach than a traditional teacher, a subtle but important distinction. Experts in debriefing report that blended approaches to debriefing are more successful than rigid, structured programs. The ability to maintain a fluid environment during the debriefing session to keep a learner’s needs and goals at the forefront is paramount. In some scenarios, a “reflective pause” can be utilized to initiate debriefing and feedback in the midst of a scenario or task. This feedback on the fly can often capture and take advantage of the learner’s internal monologue to break down decision-making or ongoing self-evaluation which may reveal subtle learning points that would otherwise be missed in traditional end of scenario debriefing.

The ultimate goal of medical simulation is to positively impact patient outcomes. There is mounting evidence to suggest that if surgical educators use a structured debriefing approach and coaching models, trainees will perform better than in a traditional teaching model. Overall, the importance of debriefing in simulation and medical education cannot be overstated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tuckey MR, Scott JE. Group critical incident stress debriefing with emergency services personnel: a randomized controlled trial. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2014;27(1):38–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kolb D. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Salas E, Klein C, King H, et al. Debriefing medical teams: 12 evidence-based best practices and tips. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34(9):518–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lederman LC. Debriefing: toward a systematic assessment of theory and practice. Simul Gaming. 1992;23(2):145–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Petranek C. A maturation in experiential learning: principles of simulation and gaming. Simul Gaming. 1994;25(4):513–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(2):115–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Krogh K, Bearman M, Nestel D. “Thinking on your feet”—a qualitative study of debriefing practice. Adv Simul. 2016;1:12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Landerville J, Cheung W, Frank J, Richardson D. A definition for coaching in medical education. Can Med Educ J. 2019;10(4):e109–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cheng A, Hunt EA, Donoghue A, Nelson-McMillan K, Nishisaki A, Leflore J, Eppich W, Moyer M, Brett-Fleegler M, Kleinman M, Anderson J, Adler M, Braga M, Kost S, Stryjewski G, Min S, Podraza J, Lopreiato J, Hamilton MF, Stone K, Reid J, Hopkins J, Manos J, Duff J, Richard M, Nadkarni VM, EXPRESS Investigators. Examining pediatric resuscitation education using simulation and scripted debriefing: a multicenter randomized trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167(6):528–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Thiagarajan S, Thiagi Gameletter. Seriously fun activities for trainers, facilitators, performance consultants, and managers; 2008. http://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/august2008.html#ToolKit. Accessed 22 Dec 2020.

  11. Clapper TC, Leighton K. Incorporating the reflective pause in simulation: a practical guide. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2020;51(1):32–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Raemer DB, Eppich WJ. Debriefing as formative assessment: closing performance gaps in medical education. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):1010–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng A, Eppich W, Grant V, Sherbino J, Zendejas B, Cook D. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2014;48(7):657–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, Joo HS, Chow R, Hamstra SJ. Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology. 2006;105(2):279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Hamstra SJ, Morgan PJ. Barriers to the use of simulation-based education. Can J Anesth. 2005;52(9):944–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stewart L. Ethical issues in postexperimental and postexperiential debriefing. Simul Gaming. 1992;23(2):196–211.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Simon R, Raemer DB, Rudolph JW. Debriefing assessment for simulation in healthcare (DASH)© Rater’s handbook. Boston: Center for Medical Simulation; 2010. https://harvardmedsim.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/DASH.handbook.2010.Final.Rev.2.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kirkpatrick D, Kirkpatrick J, editors. Evaluating training programs. The four levels. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Capella J, Smith S, Philp A, Putnam T, Gilbert C, Fry W, Harvey E, Wright A, Henderson K, Baker D, Ranson S, Remine S. Teamwork training improves the clinical care of trauma patients. J Surg Educ. 2010;67(6):439–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, Satava RM. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2002;236(4):458–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Zendejas B, Cook DA, Bingener J, Huebner M, Dunn WF, Sarr MG, Farley DR. Simulation-based mastery learning improves patient outcomes in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2011;254(3):502–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yule S, Henrickson Parker S, Wilkinson J, McKinley A, MacDonald J, Neill A, McAdam T. Coaching non-technical skills improves surgical residents’ performance in a simulated operating room. J Surg Educ. 2015;72(6):1124–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bonrath EM, Dedy NJ, Gordon LE, Grantcharov TP. Comprehensive surgical coaching enhances surgical skill in the operating room: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2015;262(2):205–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gagnon LH, Abbasi N. Systematic review of randomized controlled trials on the role of coaching in surgery to improve learner outcomes. Am J Surg. 2018;216(1):140–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roberts NK, Williams RG, Kim MJ, Dunnington GL. The briefing, intraoperative teaching, debriefing model for teaching in the operating room. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208(2):299–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gardner AK. The Briefing: Intra-Op Teaching-Debriefing (B-I-D) Model [Podium Presentation]. SAGES Annual Meeting 2017. Houston; 2017 Mar 2. https://www.sages.org/video/the-briefing-intra-op-teaching-debriefing-b-i-d-model/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neal E. Seymour .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Smith, B.W., Seymour, N.E. (2022). Debriefing After Simulation. In: Romanelli, J.R., Dort, J.M., Kowalski, R.B., Sinha, P. (eds) The SAGES Manual of Quality, Outcomes and Patient Safety. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94610-4_30

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94610-4_30

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-94609-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-94610-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics