Effectiveness of Video-assisted Debriefing Versus Standard Oral Debriefing Following Screen-based Simulation (CyberPatient TM) Training

Toktam Masoumain Hosseini, S. Ahmady
{"title":"Effectiveness of Video-assisted Debriefing Versus Standard Oral Debriefing Following Screen-based Simulation (CyberPatient TM) Training","authors":"Toktam Masoumain Hosseini, S. Ahmady","doi":"10.5812/jme-127021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: A common recommendation to develop skillful practice is to playback videos during debriefing; however, no study has addressed the advantages of such a technique. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the pedagogical effectiveness of video-assisted debriefing and oral debriefing in simulation-based training. By comparing video-assisted debriefing and traditional oral debriefing, it was hypothesized that video-assisted debriefing would improve medical students' decision-making skills and professional attitudes. Methods: This quasi-experimental study used a pretest-posttest design. The study encompassed 76 medical students in the fourth year of their seven-year training program. The participants were selected using a census and were then randomly divided into intervention (video-assisted debriefing, n = 36) and control (oral debriefing, n = 40) groups. The required data were collected using a demographic information questionnaire, the Penn State College of Medicine Professionalism Questionnaire, and Lauri and Salantera’s (2002) Clinical Decision-making Questionnaire. Descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation were used to describe the participants’ characteristics. Paired t-test and independent t-test were run to compare the medical students’ clinical decision-making and professional attitude scores before and after the intervention within and between the groups. Results: There was no significant difference in the medical students’ clinical decision-making skills between the two groups before the intervention (P = 0.09); however, significant differences were observed in both groups after the intervention (P < 0.001). Moreover, there was no significant difference in the professional attitude of medical students between the two groups before the intervention (P = 0.03); however, there were significant differences in both groups after the intervention (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The findings revealed that simulation-based training with video-assisted debriefing was more effective in developing the undergraduate medical students' decision-making skills and promoting their professional attitudes.","PeriodicalId":30594,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Education Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Education Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/jme-127021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: A common recommendation to develop skillful practice is to playback videos during debriefing; however, no study has addressed the advantages of such a technique. Objectives: The present study aimed to compare the pedagogical effectiveness of video-assisted debriefing and oral debriefing in simulation-based training. By comparing video-assisted debriefing and traditional oral debriefing, it was hypothesized that video-assisted debriefing would improve medical students' decision-making skills and professional attitudes. Methods: This quasi-experimental study used a pretest-posttest design. The study encompassed 76 medical students in the fourth year of their seven-year training program. The participants were selected using a census and were then randomly divided into intervention (video-assisted debriefing, n = 36) and control (oral debriefing, n = 40) groups. The required data were collected using a demographic information questionnaire, the Penn State College of Medicine Professionalism Questionnaire, and Lauri and Salantera’s (2002) Clinical Decision-making Questionnaire. Descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation were used to describe the participants’ characteristics. Paired t-test and independent t-test were run to compare the medical students’ clinical decision-making and professional attitude scores before and after the intervention within and between the groups. Results: There was no significant difference in the medical students’ clinical decision-making skills between the two groups before the intervention (P = 0.09); however, significant differences were observed in both groups after the intervention (P < 0.001). Moreover, there was no significant difference in the professional attitude of medical students between the two groups before the intervention (P = 0.03); however, there were significant differences in both groups after the intervention (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The findings revealed that simulation-based training with video-assisted debriefing was more effective in developing the undergraduate medical students' decision-making skills and promoting their professional attitudes.
在基于屏幕的模拟(CyberPatient TM)培训后,视频辅助汇报与标准口头汇报的有效性
背景:培养熟练练习的一个常见建议是在汇报过程中回放视频;然而,还没有研究指出这种技术的优点。目的:本研究旨在比较视频辅助述职和口头述职在模拟训练中的教学效果。通过对视频辅助述职与传统口头述职的比较,我们假设视频辅助述职能提高医学生的决策技能和职业态度。方法:准实验研究采用前测后测设计。这项研究包括76名医学院学生,他们正在进行为期七年的培训计划的第四年。通过人口普查选择参与者,然后随机分为干预组(视频辅助汇报,n = 36)和对照组(口头汇报,n = 40)。所需要的数据是通过人口统计信息问卷、宾夕法尼亚州立医学院专业问卷和Lauri和Salantera(2002)临床决策问卷收集的。描述性统计如平均值和标准差被用来描述参与者的特征。采用配对t检验和独立t检验比较干预前后医学生临床决策和专业态度得分在组内和组间的差异。结果:干预前两组医学生临床决策能力差异无统计学意义(P = 0.09);但干预后两组间差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。干预前两组医学生的专业态度差异无统计学意义(P = 0.03);但干预后两组比较差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。结论:视频辅助述职的模拟训练能更有效地培养医学生的决策能力和职业态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信