Advertisement

Scenario Design

  • Nathan GollehonEmail author
Chapter
  • 12 Downloads
Part of the Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation book series (CHS)

Abstract

This chapter will explore the process of scenario design. Scenario design is perhaps the most important yet difficult phase of implementing a simulation curriculum, regardless of whether that curriculum is delivered in a high-fidelity simulation center or via a mobile training session. Scenarios should be developed using educationally-sound practices, driven by a needs assessment and the learning objectives of the simulation. The choice of formative versus summative assessment will also be determined by the needs of the participants.

While scenario design can be time-consuming, the process can be made more efficient through the use of design templates and storyboards. Design templates ensure that important aspects of a simulation scenario are accounted for as the scenario is being created. Ultimately, if good practices are followed, time spent upfront on scenario design will result in a more robust simulation experience for the participants, more realistic learning experiences, and better educational outcomes.

Keywords

Fidelity Realism Storyboard Needs assessment Learning objectives Summative Formative Assessment 

Abbreviations

INACSL

International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation and Learning

SMART

Specific measurable achievable relevant time-bound

References

  1. 1.
    McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. A critical review of simulation-based mastery learning with translational outcomes. Med Educ. 2014;48(4):375–85.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shemanko GA, Jones L. Chapter 8: to simulate or not to simulate: that is the question. In: Kyle RR, Murray WB, editors. Clinical simulation: operations, engineering and management. New York: Elsevier; 2010. 848 p.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chickering AW, Gamson ZF. Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. Biochem Educ. 1989;17(3):140–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schunk DH. Learning theories: an educational perspective. 6th ed. Pearson Education: Harlow; 2014. 576 p.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Glavin RJ. Chapter 7: when simulation should and should not be in the curriculum. In: Kyle RR, Murray WB, editors. Clinical simulation: operations, engineering and management. New York: Elsevier; 2010. p. 71–6.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Durham CF, Alden KR. Chapter 51: enhancing patient safety in nursing education through patient simulation. In: Hughes RG, editor. Patient safety and quality: an evidence-based handbook for nurses. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008. p. 1–46.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Knowles MS. The modern practice of adult education: from pedagogy to andragogy. Revised and updated. Englewood Cliffs: Cambridge Adult Education; 1980. 400 p.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lowenthal P, Wilson BG. Labels do matter! A critique of AECT’s redefinition of the field. Tech Trends. 2010;54(1):38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    INACSL Standards Committee. INACSL standards of best practice: simulationSM simulation design. Clin Simul Nurs. 2016;12(S):S5–S12.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Benishek LE, Lazzara EH, Gaught WL, Arcaro LL, Okuda Y, Salas E. The template of events for applied and critical healthcare simulation (TEACH Sim): a tool for systematic simulation scenario design. Simul Healthc. 2015;10(1):21–30.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    California Simulation Alliance. Simulation scenario template 2008 [updated March 2011; cited 2018 Nov 30]. Available from: https://healthimpact.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/CSA-Scenario-Template-4-2011.pdf.
  12. 12.
    Bray B. American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Human patient simulation scenario development patient case template. 2014 [updated January 31 2014; cited 2018 Nov 30]. Available from: http://www.aacp.org/meetingsandevents/AM/Documents/Simulation%20Scenario%20case%20template%206-8-10.pdf.
  13. 13.
    Jeffries PR. Simulation in nursing education: from conceptualization to evaluation. 2nd ed. New York: National League for Nursing; 2007. 288 p.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. SAEM Simulation interest group simulation scenario template. 2014 [updated February 2012; cited 2018 Nov 30]. Available from: http://stage.saem.org/sites/default/files/SAEM%20SIG%20scenario%20template%20RIHMSC%20rev%202.8.09.pdf.
  15. 15.
    Taekman JM. Template for simulation patient design. Durham, NC: Duke University Medical Center; 2003. [updated 2003 December 2; cited 2018 Nov 30]. Available from: http://simcenter.duke.edu/support.htm.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nayahangan LJ, Stefanidis D, Kern DE, Konge L. How to identify and prioritize procedures suitable for simulation-based training: experiences from general needs assessments using a modified Delphi method and a needs assessment formula. Med Teach. 2018;40(7):676–83.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jarzemsky P, McCarthy J, Ellis N. Incorporating quality and safety education for nurses competencies in simulation scenario design. Nurse Educ. 2010;35(2):90–2.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bloom BS. Taxonomy of educational objectives book 1: cognition domain. White Plains: Longman; 1956. 207 p.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Anderson LW. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston: Pearson Education; 2000. 336 p.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bjerke MB, Renger R. Being smart about writing SMART objectives. Eval Program Plann. 2017;61:125–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Popham WJ. Classroom assessment: what teachers need to know. 8th ed. Boston: Pearson Education; 2018. 448 p.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stillman PL, Ruggill JS, Rutala PJ, Sabers DL. Patient instructors as teachers and evaluators. J Med Educ. 1980;55(3):186–93.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boulet JR, Jeffries PR, Hatala RA, Korndorffer JR, Feinstein DM, Roche JP. Research regarding methods of assessing learning outcomes. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(S):S48–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Doumouras AG, Keshet I, Nathens AB, Ahmed N, Hicks CM. Trauma non-technical training (TNT-2): the development, piloting and multilevel assessment of a simulation-based, interprofessional curriculum for team-based trauma resuscitation. Can J Surg. 2014;57(5):354–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    King AE, Conrad M, Ahmed RA. Improving collaboration among medical, nursing and respiratory therapy students through interprofessional simulation. J Interprof Care. 2013;27(3):269–71.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Welsch LA, Hoch J, Poston RD, Parodi VA, Akpinar-Elci M. Interprofessional education involving didactic TeamSTEPPS and interactive healthcare simulation: a systematic review. J Interprof Care. 2018;14:1–9.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Garbee DD, Paige J, Barrier K, Kozmenko V, Kozmenko L, Zamjahn J, et al. Interprofessional teamwork among students in simulated codes: a quasi-experimental study. Nurs Educ Perscpect. 2013;34(5):339–44.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Paige JT, Garbee DD, Kozmenko V, Yu Q, Kozmenko L, Yang T, et al. Getting a head start: high-fidelity, simulation-based operating room team training of interprofessional students. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218(1):140–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Page-Cutrara K, Turk M. Impact of prebriefing on competency performance, clinical judgement and experience in simulation: an experimental study. Nurse Educ Today. 2017;48:78–83.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chmil JV. Prebriefing in simulation-based learning experiences. Nurse Educ. 2016;41(2):64–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rodgers DL, Securro S, Pauley RD. The effect of high-fidelity simulation on educational outcomes in an advanced cardiovascular life support course. Simul Healthc. 2009;4(4):200–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Issenberg SB, McGagie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10–28.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Founds SA, Zewe G, Scheuer LA. Development of high-fidelity simulated experiences for baccalaureate nursing students. J Prof Nurs. 2011;27(1):5–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):183–93.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pywell MJ, Evgeniou E, Highway K, Pitt E, Estela CM. High fidelity, low cost moulage as a valid simulation tool to improve burns education. Burns. 2016;42(4):844–52.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ali AA, Miller ET. Effectiveness of video-assisted debriefing in health education: an integrative review. J Nurs Educ. 2018;57(1):14–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Harden RM, Crosby J. AMEE Guide No 20: the good teacher is more than a lecturer. The twelve roles of the teacher. Med Teach. 2000;24(4):334–47.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dieckmann P, MolinFriis S, Lippert A, Ostergaard D. The art and science of debriefing in simulation: ideal and practice. Med Teach. 2009;31(7):e287–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Boet S, Bould MD, Bruppacher HR, Desjardins F, Chandra DB, Naik VN. Looking in the mirror: self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(6):1377–81.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(2):115–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Roberts C, Newble D, Jolly B, Reed M, Hampton K. Assuring the quality of high-stakes undergraduate assessments of clinical competence. Med Teach. 2006;28(6):535–43.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Downing SM. Validity: on the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ. 2003;37(9):830–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kane MT. Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. J Educ Meas. 2013;50:1–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cook DA, Brydges R, Ginsburg S, Hatala R. A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane’s framework. Med Educ. 2015;49(6):560–75.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Smith AB, Lammers SE. Chapter 8.5: the ethics of simulation. In: Palaganas JC, Maxmorthy JC, Epps CA, Mancini ME, editors. Defining excellence in simulation programs. Philadelphia: Wolters/Kluwer; 2015. p. 593–603.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gaba DM. Simulations that are challenging to the psyche of participants: how much should we worry and about what? Simul Healthc. 2013;8(1):4–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Nebraska Medical CenterOmahaUSA

Personalised recommendations