Who Can Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare? Different Perspectives on Teledebriefing Assessments.

INTRODUCTION: Virtual debriefing is a cardinal element to achieve the effectiveness of telesimulation. There are different instruments to assess face-to-face debriefing to determine the degree of effectiveness of debriefing; Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) instrument is one of them. This study aims to describe and compare the evaluation of raters, instructors, and students during a virtual debriefing using the DASH. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed evaluating the virtual debriefing of 30 instructors after a heart failure telesimulation scenario. The evaluation was conducted by 30 instructors, 338 undergraduate students in the seventh semester, and 7 simulation raters. The 3 versions of the DASH instrument in Spanish were applied, respectively. RESULTS: Two comparisons were made, student versus instructor and rater versus instructor. Cronbach α was 0.97 for each version. The averages of the results on the DASH instrument were: 6.61 (3.34-7.0), 5.95 (4.65-7.0), and 4.84 (2.68-6.02) for student, rater, and instructor versions, respectively. The size effect between student and debriefer perspectives was 0.42. In contrast, the size effect between instructor and rater was 0.72. All differences were significant. CONCLUSIONS: There are different rates between the persons who use the DASH. In this study, from the perspective of the instructor and rater, the difference was 1 point with a wide range, in contrast with the difference between instructor and student, which is relatively minor. It is necessary to consider the perspectives of experts in the subject to achieve a virtual debriefing of high quality and improve a debriefing by using the DASH.

Implementation Barriers in Telesimulation as an Educational Strategy: An Interpretative Description.

Introduction Telesimulation is one of the different methodologies for distance learning to promote competency in medical trainees. This methodology needs to have professors, students, and standardized patients in one session to perform a teleconsultation. Telesimulation could lead to multiple implementation barriers. This study aims to describe the implementation barriers through the perspective of the professors, students, and standardized patients in a telesimulation scenario in undergraduate medical education. Method We designed and applied a telesimulation scenario in undergraduate medical students. Then we conducted an online questionnaire with the critical incidents technique. The study sample was 18 professors, 26 standardized patients, and 407 students Results We describe a taxonomy with five categories and each one with different subcategories: knowledge (clinical simulation, theoretical over the clinical case, and use of simulators), facilities (access, time of use, and functionality), financing (payment to staff and purchase of equipment), attitude (acceptance and emotion), and participants (communication, collaborative work, and debriefing). Conclusion The description of the implementation barriers through multiple perspectives generates a taxonomy that could improve the quality of the telesimulation. This taxonomy is a proposal to consider the design, implementation, and evaluation when a telesimulation is implemented. The taxonomy could generate a structured plan when the educators implement the telesimulations at their own institutions considering all the barriers proposed.