Fahad Zeed Alanez, Elaine Miller, Caroline F Morrison, Benjamin Kelcey, Robin Wagner
{"title":"护理背景下的热汇报与冷汇报：综合评述。","authors":"Fahad Zeed Alanez, Elaine Miller, Caroline F Morrison, Benjamin Kelcey, Robin Wagner","doi":"10.3928/01484834-20240529-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hot debriefing occurs shortly after simulations or real-life events, whereas cold debriefings occur after 24 hours. This integrative review examined the effects of hot versus cold debriefing after simulation on prelicensure students.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Whittemore and Knafl's five-stage method was followed. Databases searched included PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO. The inclusion criteria were studies published in English that involved prelicensure nursing students and measured the effect of hot or cold debriefing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Themes emerged from 10 studies and included clinical judgment and decision making, knowledge and skills, participant experiences, reflection, and psychological safety and self-efficacy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hot debriefing was preferred by participants, but cold debriefing resulted in higher knowledge and skills scores. In addition, students in the cold debriefing group were more conformable and in a safe environment compared with the hot debriefing group. Drawing a strong conclusion was difficult due to heterogeneity in study designs and methods. <b>[<i>J Nurs Educ</i>. 2024;63(10):653-658.]</b>.</p>","PeriodicalId":94241,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of nursing education","volume":"63 10","pages":"653-658"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hot Versus Cold Debriefing in a Nursing Context: An Integrative Review.\",\"authors\":\"Fahad Zeed Alanez, Elaine Miller, Caroline F Morrison, Benjamin Kelcey, Robin Wagner\",\"doi\":\"10.3928/01484834-20240529-02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hot debriefing occurs shortly after simulations or real-life events, whereas cold debriefings occur after 24 hours. This integrative review examined the effects of hot versus cold debriefing after simulation on prelicensure students.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Whittemore and Knafl's five-stage method was followed. Databases searched included PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO. The inclusion criteria were studies published in English that involved prelicensure nursing students and measured the effect of hot or cold debriefing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Themes emerged from 10 studies and included clinical judgment and decision making, knowledge and skills, participant experiences, reflection, and psychological safety and self-efficacy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Hot debriefing was preferred by participants, but cold debriefing resulted in higher knowledge and skills scores. In addition, students in the cold debriefing group were more conformable and in a safe environment compared with the hot debriefing group. Drawing a strong conclusion was difficult due to heterogeneity in study designs and methods. <b>[<i>J Nurs Educ</i>. 2024;63(10):653-658.]</b>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of nursing education\",\"volume\":\"63 10\",\"pages\":\"653-658\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of nursing education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20240529-02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of nursing education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20240529-02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Hot Versus Cold Debriefing in a Nursing Context: An Integrative Review.
Background: Hot debriefing occurs shortly after simulations or real-life events, whereas cold debriefings occur after 24 hours. This integrative review examined the effects of hot versus cold debriefing after simulation on prelicensure students.
Method: Whittemore and Knafl's five-stage method was followed. Databases searched included PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO. The inclusion criteria were studies published in English that involved prelicensure nursing students and measured the effect of hot or cold debriefing.
Results: Themes emerged from 10 studies and included clinical judgment and decision making, knowledge and skills, participant experiences, reflection, and psychological safety and self-efficacy.
Conclusion: Hot debriefing was preferred by participants, but cold debriefing resulted in higher knowledge and skills scores. In addition, students in the cold debriefing group were more conformable and in a safe environment compared with the hot debriefing group. Drawing a strong conclusion was difficult due to heterogeneity in study designs and methods. [J Nurs Educ. 2024;63(10):653-658.].
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
