跨专业交接技能学习的两种汇报方法比较

IF 0.5 Q4 REHABILITATION
J. Ronnebaum, Chunfa Jie, Kristina Salazar
{"title":"跨专业交接技能学习的两种汇报方法比较","authors":"J. Ronnebaum, Chunfa Jie, Kristina Salazar","doi":"10.1097/JAT.0000000000000200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Interprofessional (IP) handoff communication is imperative for patient safety in high-risk environments. Debriefing is an essential component of the learning process of this skill. Currently, one method of debriefing has not proven more effective than another. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare 2 forms of debriefing (face-to-face [F2F] debriefing vs computerized personal reflection) on learning and retention of IP handoff communication. Methods: Fifty-two (n = 52) third-year doctor of physical therapy students completed IP simulated experiences, followed by debriefing. Subjects were divided into 2 groups: (a) F2F debriefing (n = 26) and (b) computerized personal reflection (n = 26). Observed IP handoff communication behaviors were measured with an assessment tool. Results: Overall IP handoff skills improved from pre- to posttest scores (P < .05). The F2F debriefing demonstrated greater improvement in the delivery of communication and content skills (P < .05) than computerized personal reflection debriefing. Conclusion: The F2F debriefing should be included in the training of current and future physical therapists.","PeriodicalId":42472,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of 2 Methods of Debriefing for Learning of Interprofessional Handoff Skills\",\"authors\":\"J. Ronnebaum, Chunfa Jie, Kristina Salazar\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JAT.0000000000000200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Interprofessional (IP) handoff communication is imperative for patient safety in high-risk environments. Debriefing is an essential component of the learning process of this skill. Currently, one method of debriefing has not proven more effective than another. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare 2 forms of debriefing (face-to-face [F2F] debriefing vs computerized personal reflection) on learning and retention of IP handoff communication. Methods: Fifty-two (n = 52) third-year doctor of physical therapy students completed IP simulated experiences, followed by debriefing. Subjects were divided into 2 groups: (a) F2F debriefing (n = 26) and (b) computerized personal reflection (n = 26). Observed IP handoff communication behaviors were measured with an assessment tool. Results: Overall IP handoff skills improved from pre- to posttest scores (P < .05). The F2F debriefing demonstrated greater improvement in the delivery of communication and content skills (P < .05) than computerized personal reflection debriefing. Conclusion: The F2F debriefing should be included in the training of current and future physical therapists.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JAT.0000000000000200\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JAT.0000000000000200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:跨专业(IP)切换通信对于高风险环境中的患者安全至关重要。汇报是这项技能学习过程中的一个重要组成部分。目前,一种汇报方法还没有被证明比另一种更有效。因此,本研究的目的是比较两种形式的汇报(面对面[F2F]汇报与计算机化的个人反思)对IP切换通信的学习和保留。方法:52名物理治疗博士三年级学生完成IP模拟体验,然后进行汇报。受试者被分为两组:(a)F2F汇报(n=26)和(b)计算机化的个人反思(n=26)。用评估工具测量观察到的IP切换通信行为。结果:总体IP切换技能从测试前到测试后的得分都有所提高(P<0.05)。与计算机化的个人反思汇报相比,F2F汇报在沟通和内容技能的传递方面表现出更大的改善(P<.05)。结论:F2F汇报应纳入当前和未来物理治疗师的培训中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of 2 Methods of Debriefing for Learning of Interprofessional Handoff Skills
Purpose: Interprofessional (IP) handoff communication is imperative for patient safety in high-risk environments. Debriefing is an essential component of the learning process of this skill. Currently, one method of debriefing has not proven more effective than another. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare 2 forms of debriefing (face-to-face [F2F] debriefing vs computerized personal reflection) on learning and retention of IP handoff communication. Methods: Fifty-two (n = 52) third-year doctor of physical therapy students completed IP simulated experiences, followed by debriefing. Subjects were divided into 2 groups: (a) F2F debriefing (n = 26) and (b) computerized personal reflection (n = 26). Observed IP handoff communication behaviors were measured with an assessment tool. Results: Overall IP handoff skills improved from pre- to posttest scores (P < .05). The F2F debriefing demonstrated greater improvement in the delivery of communication and content skills (P < .05) than computerized personal reflection debriefing. Conclusion: The F2F debriefing should be included in the training of current and future physical therapists.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
40.00%
发文量
25
×
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