Debriefing is defined as a “discussion between two or more individuals in which aspects of a performance are explored and analyzed with the aim of gaining insight that impacts the quality of future clinical practice” (Cheng et al., 2015 p. 69).
In healthcare simulation, debriefing occurs after a simulated activity and is described as “a venue for learners to reflect on actions, discuss areas for improvement, and incorporate new information with previous knowledge” (Cheng et al., 2016, p 32). The goal of debriefing is to help transform experience into reflection and learning. Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (described on the Theories page) outlines this process.
The debriefing process aims to identify and address any gaps noted in knowledge, skills, or communication. During the simulation, facilitators compare the desired outcomes with the performance they observe in the simulation. The difference between the observed and desired outcomes is known as the performance gap (Simon, Raemer, & Rudolph, 2010; Watt et al., 2021). Debriefing time should not be used for planned didactic lectures, but directive feedback/teaching may be necessary to address performance or knowledge gaps.
Watch this short video:
Consider reading the following article:
Note: Nova Scotia Health employees and physicians should select "View Full Text". External users can check for access through their own institutional subscription or request via interlibrary loan/document delivery.
The Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best Practice (HSSOBP™) describe the importance of debriefing. Literature highlights the crucial role debriefing plays in SBE. The most critical component to a successful and impactful simulation-based learning experience is the debriefing after the event (Cheng et el., 2015; Cheng et al., 2016; Decker et al., 2021; Eppich & Cheng 2015; Ross, 2020; Watt et al., 2021). A deliberate debriefing process must be used (Cheng, Eppich, Kolbe, Meguerdichian, Bajaj & Grant, 2020). Simulation without debriefing can be detrimental for participants.
According to the 2021 HSSOBP™ Debriefing Process Standard, the debriefing process is:
(Decker, et al..2021)
©2021 INACSL. Used with permission.
Debriefing assists learners with transforming experiences into learning through reflection. It should include:
The goal of debriefing is to promote clinical reasoning and reflective thinking. One important reason to debrief is to understand the participant’s rationale, point of view, or frame. Think, 'What’s their frame (WTF)?'. It is difficult to discern critical thinking or rationale merely from observing behaviors (Eppich & Cheng, 2015).
Additional reasons for debriefing include:
Debriefing can occur in many settings and formats.
Debriefing may be guided by a facilitator (facilitator-guided) or the participant (self-guided) (Sawyer, Eppich, Brett-Fleegler, Grant & Cheng, 2016). Self-guided debriefs are more common after virtual simulation. Facilitator-guided debriefs are more common in standard healthcare simulation. This guide focuses on facilitator-guided debriefing.
Post-event debriefing is an intentional discussion between the facilitator(s) and participants following an experience. It allows participants to gain a clear understanding of their actions and thought processes to promote learning outcomes and enhance future clinical performance.
There are multiple forms of post-event debriefing:
Debriefing can occur immediately following a simulation, or it can be planned for a future time. Best practice is to have the debrief as close in time to the simulated experience as possible.
Debriefing often occurs in person, where groups are physically present together. However, the increase in virtual simulation and computer-based simulation has increased the need for virtual debriefing.
Read more about virtual debriefing in this article:
Debriefing can occur with one or more facilitators. Using more than one facilitator is referred to as co-facilitating or co-debriefing. Preplanned strategies are needed to promote an effective debrief. Interprofessional considerations must be addressed when the participants and the debriefers are from different professions. Consider the variable scope, team functioning, communication, and understanding of roles among the group.
Read more about co-debriefing strategies in this article:
Debriefers may use recorded videos of the simulated experience to guide the debrief. This is referred to as video-assisted debriefing. There are positive and negative aspects associated with video-assisted debriefs. Ensure strategies to promote psychological safety are used, including the purpose for using video recording and confidentiality.
To learn more about the topic, consider reading:
(Cheng et al., 2016; Decker et al., 2021; Jefferies et al, 2016; Ross, 2020)
There are several phases in the debriefing process. Most evidence-informed frameworks will include some variation of these phases, but they may use slightly different terminology.
Psychological safety is necessary for effective debriefings. Given the nature of simulation-based education, inherent threats to psychological safety are present (Kolbe et al., 2020). Restoring and re-establishing a safe learning environment during the debriefing phase is crucial for effective learning. Kolbe et al (2020, p.164) describe a psychologically safe debriefing environment as giving the “the perception that it is safe to take interpersonal risks and that one will not be embarrassed, rejected or otherwise punished for speaking their mind, not knowing or asking questions”.
Psychological safety is needed on three levels:
Kolbe et al. (2020) state that psychological safety during an interprofessional debriefing can be unstable as not all members of the team may experience the same level of psychological safety at the same time.
The strategies used in the prebrief phase to promote psychological safety will set the stage for psychological safety in the debrief. That alone will not ensure it. Similar strategies must be incorporated into the debrief.
Specific explicit and implicit strategies for establishing, maintaining, and restoring psychological safety during debriefing include:
Read the following article that further describes strategies for psychological safety during debriefing:
The competency of team members conducting a debrief significantly influences learning outcomes (Jeffries, et al., 2016). The debriefing process is complex. The debriefer must have training/education to best facilitate structured post-simulation discussions. Performing the role of a debriefer is an advanced skill but not one that necessarily comes with seniority. Debriefing skills, like all educator facilitation skills, develop over time with practice and feedback. Ongoing professional development, as well as peer feedback, is recommended. Facilitators that assume this role must be both knowledgeable and skilled in understanding the participants’ needs. Facilitators must be flexible in how they conduct a debrief depending on how the simulation unfolds (Ross, 2020).
The role of the debriefer is to:
(Jeffries et al., 2016)
Other important considerations for the debriefer include:
(Kamal et al., 2020; Ross, 2020; Seelandt, Walker, & Kolbe, 2021)
You can use a variety of strategies to debrief simulations, but you must use an evidence-informed, validated framework
Choose a tool that meets your specific needs and become familiar with it.
Commonly used tools/frameworks include:
(Decker et al., 2021; Rudolph et al., 2006; Eppich & Cheng, 2015; Bajaj et al., 2018)
The PEARLS debriefing tool integrates learner self-assessment (plus-delta), focused facilitated discussion (advocacy-inquiry) and providing information in the form of directive feedback or teaching.
For more information:
Read:
Eppich, W., & Cheng, A. (2015). Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simulation in healthcare: Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 10(2), 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072
Watch:
Pearls Debriefing Overview. https://youtu.be/o3LPjlG6Yqo?si=i_Xcon62KNnzVskj
Copies of the PEARLS tool (electronic and printable) can be found at: https://debrief2learn.org/pearls-debriefing-tool/
Integrating principles of equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) into prebriefing and debriefing sessions prepares learners to provide high-quality, equitable healthcare to patients of diverse backgrounds, with the goal of reducing health disparities. Debriefing allows for the application of EDI concepts presented during the simulation scenario. It promotes discussion of EDI topics in a safe space, and reflection on any biases identified during the simulation experience.
EDI principles can be integrated into simulation debriefings by exploring:
(Alrimawi et al., 2024).
Novice and experienced debriefers often struggle with how to intervene in difficult situations without compromising the benefits of SBE, and specifically, the debrief. This may include situations when learners are quiet, disengaged, dominant, or display emotional reactions.
Consider reading the following article:
Note: Full text of this article is not available in Nova Scotia Health Library Services' collection. You can request a copy through our Document Delivery Service.
Alrimawi, I., El-Banna, M.M., O'Reilly, C., & Muhammad, K. (2024, April). Integrating diversity, equity, and inclusion in nursing simulation and clinical. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 19(2), e439-e443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2024.01.010
Bajaj, K., Meguerdichian, M., Thoma, B., Huang, S., Eppich, W., & Cheng, A. (2018). The PEARLS healthcare debriefing tool. Academic Medicine, 93(2), 336. https://debrief2learn.org/pearls-debriefing-tool/
Cheng, A., Palaganas, J., Eppich, W., Rudolph, J. Robinson, T., & Grant, V. (2015). Co-debriefing for simulation-based education: A primer for facilitators. Simulation in Healthcare, 10(2):69-75 https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000077
Decker, S., Alinier, G., Crawford, S. B., Gordon, R. M., Jenkins, D., & Wilson, C. (2021). Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best Practice® The debriefing process. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 58, 27-32 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2021.08.011
Duff, J. P., Morse, K. J., Seelandt, J., Gross, I. T., Lydston, M., Sargeant, J., ... & Kolbe, M. (2024). Debriefing methods for simulation in healthcare: A systematic review. Simulation in Healthcare, 19(1S), S112-S121. https://journals.lww.com/simulationinhealthcare/fulltext/2024/01001/debriefing_methods_for_simulation_in_healthcare__a.12.aspx?context=latestarticles
Endacott, R., Gale, T., Anita O’Connor, & Dix, S. (2019). Frameworks and quality measures used for debriefing in team-based simulation: a systematic review. BMJ Simulation & Technology Enhanced Learning, 5(2), 61 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2017-000297
Eppich, W., & Cheng, A. (2015). Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): Development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simulation in Healthcare, 10(2), 106 115. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072
Grant, V.J., Robinson, T., Catena, H., Eppich, W. & Cheng, A. (2018). Difficult debriefing situations: A toolbox for simulation educators. Medical Teacher, 40(7), 703–712 https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1468558
Holmboe, E.S., Durning, S.J., & Hawkins, R.E. (2018). Practical guide to the evaluation of clinical competence (2nd ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation & Learning. (2021). Facilitation [Infographic].https://www.inacsl.org/simfographics. Used with permission.
Jeffries, P. R., Swoboda, S. M., & Akintade, B. (2016). Teaching and learning using simulations. In D.M. Billings & J.A. Halstead (Eds.), Teaching in nursing: A guide for faculty (5th ed., pp. 304-323). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.
Kolbe, M., Eppich, W., Rudolph, J., Meguerdichian, M., Catena, H., Cripps, A., Grant, V., & Cheng, A. (2020, May 1). Managing psychological safety in debriefings: A dynamic balancing act. BMJ Simulation and Technology Enhanced Learning, 6(3), 164-171. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2019-000470
Ng, G., & Lugassy, D. M. (2021). A pilot study to explore novice debriefers’ post-simulation debriefing experiences. Simulation & Gaming, 52(4), 465-477. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878120970998
Oermann, M.H., & Gaberson, K.B. (2017). Evaluation and testing in nursing education (5th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Palaganas, J., Fey, M., & Simon, R. (2016). Structured debriefing in simulation education. AACN Advanced Critical Care, 27(1), 78-85 doi.10.4037/aacnacc2016328
Ross, S. (2020). Twelve tips for effective simulation debriefing: A research-based approach. Medical Teacher, 642-645 DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1831689
Rudolph, J. W., Raemer, D. B., & Simon, R. (2014). Establishing a safe container for learning in simulation: The role of the presimulation briefing. Simulation in Healthcare, 9(6), 339-349. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000047
Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Dufresne, R. L., & Raemer, D. B. (2006). There's no such thing as “nonjudgmental” debriefing: A theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simulation in Healthcare, 1(1), 49-55.
Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Raemer, D. B., & Eppich, W. J. (2008). Debriefing as formative assessment: Closing performance gaps in medical education. Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 15(11), 1010 – 1016. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.x
Rudolph, J.W., Simon, R., Rivard, R., Dufresne, R., & Raemer, D.D. (2007). Debriefing with good judgment: Combining rigorous feedback with genuine inquiry. Anesthesiology Clinics,25(2), 361-376 DOI: 10.1016/j.anclin.2007.03.007
Sawyer, T., Eppich, W., Brett-Fleegler, A., Grant, V., & Cheng, A. (2016). More than one way to debrief: A critical review of healthcare simulation debriefing methods. Simulation in Healthcare, 11(3), 209-217.https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000148
Seelandt, J.C., Walker, K., & Kolbe, M. (2021, March 4). “A debriefer must be neutral” and other debriefing myths: A systemic inquiry-based qualitative study of taken-for-granted beliefs about clinical post-event debriefing. Advances in Simulation, 6(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-021-00161-5
Simon, R., Raemer, D. B., & Rudolph, J. W. (2010). Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH)© Rater’s Handbook. Center for Medical Simulation, Boston, Massachusetts. https://harvardmedsim.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/DASH.handbook.2010.Final.Rev.2.pdf
Simon R, Raemer D.B., Rudolph JW. (2012). Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH)© – Instructor Version, Short Form. Boston, MA: Center for Medical Simulation. https://harvardmedsim.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/DASH.IV.ShortForm.2012.05.pdf
Schertzer, K., & Waseem, M. (2023). Use of video during debriefing in medical simulation. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554619/
Verkuyl, J. L., Lapum, O., Romaniuk, D., & McCulloch, T. (2020). Exploring debriefing combinations after a virtual simulation. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 40, 36-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2019.12.00