Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Constructive Debriefing for Trauma Team Education

  • Chapter
Trauma Team Dynamics

  • 2445 Accesses

Abstract

The role of simulation-based education in training trauma teams is growing, and debriefing is a critical component of this educational modality. With increasing evidence to support the role of debriefing, more trauma programs are integrating structured debriefings into their trauma training programs. This chapter will: (1) discuss the body of literature supporting the role of debriefing in simulation-based education; (2) describe the typical structure of a post-event debriefing; (3) highlight various methods of debriefing; and (4) discuss the benefits and challenges of debriefing trauma teams after real events.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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

References

  1. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Technology enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;3306:978–88.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Gordon DL, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27:10–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Med Educ. 2010;44:50–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng A, Fanning R, Nadkarni V, Savoldelli G. Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simul Healthc. 2011;6:S52–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Arafeh JM, Hansen SS, Nichols A. Debriefing in simulated-based learning: facilitating a reflective discussion. J Perinat Neonat Nurs. 2010;24:302–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Raemer D, Eppich WJ. Debriefing as formative assessment: closing performance gaps in medical education. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Rivard P, Dufresne RL, Raemer DB. Debriefing with good judgment: combining rigorous feedback with genuine inquiry. Anesth Clin. 2007;25:361–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Dufresne RL, Raemer DB. There’s no such thing as a “non-judgmental” debriefing: a theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simul Healthc. 2006;1:49–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. 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;105:279–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Grant JS, Moss J, Epps C, Watts P. Using video-facilitated feedback to improve student performance following high-fidelity simulation. Clin Sim Nurs. 2010;6:e177–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Byrne AJ, Sellen AJ, Jones JG, Aitkenhead AR, Hussain S, Gilder F, et al. Effect of videotape feedback on anaesthetists’ performance while managing simulated anaesthetic crises: a multicenter study. Anaesthesia. 2002;57:169–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sawyer T, Sierocka-Castaneda A, Chan D, Berg B, Lustik M, Thompson M. The effectiveness of video-assisted debriefing versus oral debriefing alone at improving neonatal resuscitation performance: a randomized trial. Simul Healthc. 2012;7:213–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Van Heukelom JN, Begaz T, Treat R. Comparison of postsimulation debriefing versus in-simulation debriefing in medical simulation. Simul Healthc. 2010;5:91–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Xeroulis GJ, Park J, Moulton CA, Reznick RK, LeBlanc V, Dubrowski A. Teaching suturing and knot-typing skills to medical students: a randomized controlled study comparing computer-based video instruction and (concurrent and summary) expert feedback. Surgery. 2007;141:442–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Welke TM, LeBlanc VR, Savoldelli GL, Joo HS, Chandra DB, Crabtree NA, et al. Personalized oral debriefing versus standardized multimedia instruction after patient crisis simulation. Anesth Analg. 2009;109:183–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Boet S, Bould D, Bruppacher HR, Desjardins F, Chandra DB, Naik VN. Looking in the mirror: Self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises. Crit Care Med. 2011;39:1377–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. LeFlore JL, Anderson M, Michael JL, Engle WD, Anderson J. Comparison of self-directed learning versus instructor-modeled learning during a simulated clinical experience. Simul Healthc. 2007;2:170–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. LeFlore JL, Anderson M. Effectiveness of 2 methods to teach and evaluate new content to neonatal transport personnel using high-fidelity simulation. J Perinat Neonat Nurs. 2008;22:319–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. LeFlore JL, Anderson M. Alternative educational models for interdisciplinary student teams. Simul Healthc. 2009;4:135–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting excellence and reflective learning in simulation (PEARLS): Development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simulation in Healthcare. 2015;10(2):106–115.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gururaja RP, Yang T, Paige JT, Chauvin SW. Examining the effectiveness of debriefing at the point of care in simulation-based operating room team training. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Keyes MA, Grady ML, editors. Advances in patient safety: new directions and alternative approaches—vol. 3: Performance and Tools. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Papaspyros SC, Javangula KC, Adluri RK, O’Regan DJ. Briefing and debriefing in the cardiac operating room. Analysis of impact on theatre team attitude and patient safety. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2010;10(1):43–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Clay AS, Que L, Petrusa ER, Sebastian M, Govert J. Debriefing in the intensive care unit: a feedback tool to facilitate bedside teaching. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(3):738–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Morgan PJ, Tarshis J, LeBlanc V, Cleave-Hogg D, DeSousa S, Haley MF, et al. Efficacy of high-fidelity simulation debriefing on the performance of practicing anaesthetists in simulated scenarios. Br J Anaesth. 2009;103(4):531–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tan H. Debriefing after critical incidents for anaesthetic trainees. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2005;33:768–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dine CJ, Gersh RE, Leary M, Riegel BJ, Bellini LM, Abella BS. Improving cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality and resuscitation training by combining audiovisual feedback and debriefing. Crit Care Med. 2008;36(10):2817–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ahmed M, Sevdalis N, Paige J, Paragi-Gururaja R, Nestel D, Arora S. Identifying best practice guidelines for debriefing in surgery: a tri-continental study. Am J Surg. 2012;203(4):523–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Arora S, Ahmed M, Paige J, Nestel D, Runnacles J, Hull L, et al. Objective structured assessment of debriefing: bringing science to the art of debriefing in surgery. Ann Surg 2012. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182610c91. (Publication before print).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mitchell J. When disaster strikes: the critical incident stress debriefing process. J Emerg Med Serv. 1983;8:36–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Tuckey MR. Issues in the debriefing debate for the emergency services: moving research outcomes forward. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2007;14(2):106–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Devilly GJ, Cotton P. Psychological debriefing and the workplace: defining a concept, controversies and guidelines for intervention. Aust Psychol. 2003;38:144–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Soar J, Monsieurs KG, Ballance JH, Barelli A, Biarent D, Greif R, et al. European resuscitation council guidelines for resuscitation 2010 section 9. Principles of education in resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2010;81:1434–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Weng TI, Huang CH, Ma MH, Chang WT, Liu SC, Wang TD, et al. Improving the rate of return of spontaneous circulation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests with a formal, structured emergency resuscitation team. Resuscitation. 2004;60:137–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Edelson DP, Litzinger B, Arora V, Walsh D, Kim S, Lauderdale DS, et al. Improving in-hospital cardiac arrest process and outcomes with performance debriefing. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(10):1063–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bhanji F, Mancini ME, Sinz E, Rodgers DL, McNeil MA, Hoadley TA, et al. American heart association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science. Part 16: Education, implementation, and teams. Circulation. 2010;2010:S920–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Theophilos T, Magyar J, Babl FE. Debriefing critical incidents in the paediatric emergency department: current practice and perceived needs in Australia and New Zealand. Emerg Med Aust. 2009;21:479–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ireland S, Gilchrist J, Maconochie I. Debriefing after failed paediatric resuscitation: a survey of current UK practice. Emerg Med J. 2008;25:328–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Burns C, Harm NJ. Emergency nurses’ perceptions of critical incidents and stress debriefing. J Emerg Nurs. 1993;19(5):431–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sandhu N, Eppich W, Mikrogianakis A, Grant V, Robinson T, Cheng A. Postresuscitation debriefing in the pediatric emergency department: a national needs assessment. Can J Emerg Med. 2013;15:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rose S, Bisson J, Churchill R, Wessely S. Psychological debriefing for preventing post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;2.2.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Tannenbaum SI, Cerasoli CP. Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Hum Fact J Hum Fact Ergonom Soc. 2013;55(1):231–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zebuhr C, Sutton RM, Morrison W, Niles D, Boyle L, Nishisaki A, et al. Evaluation of quantitative debriefing after pediatric cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2012;83(9):1124–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hoyt DB, Shackford SR, Fridland PH, Mackersie RC, Hansbrough JF, Wachtel TL, et al. Video recording trauma resuscitations: an effective teaching technique. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 1988;28(4):435–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Scherer LA, Chang MC, Meredith JW, Battistella FD. Videotape review leads to rapid and sustained learning. Am J Surg. 2003;185(6):516–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Townsend RN, Clark R, Ramenofsky ML, Diamond DL. ATLS-based videotape trauma resuscitation review: education and outcome. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 1993;34(1):133–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Santora TA, Trooskin SZ, Blank CA, Clarke JR, Schinco MA. Video assessment of trauma response: adherence to ATLS protocols. Am J Emerg Med. 1996;14(6):564–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alberta Children’s Hospital, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Adam Cheng M.D., Vincent J. Grant M.D. & Naminder K. Sandhu M.D.

  2. Section of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Adam Cheng M.D., Vincent J. Grant M.D. & Naminder K. Sandhu M.D.

Authors
  1. Adam Cheng M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincent J. Grant M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Naminder K. Sandhu M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam Cheng M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

    Lawrence M. Gillman

  2. Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Sandy Widder

  3. School of Medicine, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA

    Michael Blaivas MD

  4. Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, USA

    Dimitrios Karakitsos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cheng, A., Grant, V.J., Sandhu, N.K. (2016). Constructive Debriefing for Trauma Team Education. In: Gillman, L., Widder, S., Blaivas MD, M., Karakitsos, D. (eds) Trauma Team Dynamics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16586-8_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16586-8_36

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16585-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16586-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation