Resumen
Objetivo: Sintetizar los contenidos necesarios para planificar y ejecutar debriefing estructurado y apoyado en el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje de la reanimación cardiopulmonar en un entorno simulado. Métodos: Revisión integrativa, realizada en mayo de 2021, en Biblioteca Nacional de Medicina, Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud, Scopus, Índice Acumulativo de Literatura en Enfermería y Afines y fuentes Web of Science, con asistencia de Rayyan para la selección de artículos y adopción del marco de Análisis de Contenido. Resultados: Se identificaron 469 estudios y cuatro compusieron la muestra final. Se crearon dos categorías: criterios para planificar y ejecutar el método de debriefing estructurado y apoyado, caracterizado por los objetivos relevantes para cada fase del debriefing; las acciones que permitan alcanzar las metas; problemas que desencadenan el debriefing y el tiempo de ejecución, y factores que interfieren con la calidad del debriefing estructurado y apoyado, principalmente el enfoque agresivo hacia los estudiantes y el énfasis en los errores cometidos. Consideraciones finales: Los criterios de debriefing estructurados y sustentados deben ser adoptados para apoyar la calidad de su planificación y ejecución a la luz del proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje de la simulación de reanimación cardiopulmonar.
Referencias
ANDERSON M, et al. Simulation in Advanced Practice Education: Let’s Dialogue. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2019; 26: 81-5.
BHANJI F, et al. Part 14: Education: 2015. American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2015; 132(18Suppl2): S561-73.
BOWE S, et al. Facilitation and Debriefing in Simulation Education. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 2017; 50(5): 989-1001.
CAMANHO GL. Nível de evidência. Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia. 2009; 44(6): 1-2.
COPPENS I, et al. The effectiveness of crisis resource management and team debriefing in resuscitation education of nursing students: A randomised controlled trial. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2018; 27(1-2): 77-85.
COSTA RR, et al. Perceptions of nursing students on the structural dimensions of clinical simulation. Sci Med. 2019; 29(1): e32972.
COUPER K, et al. An evaluation of three methods of in-hospital cardiac arrest educational debriefing: The cardiopulmonary resuscitation debriefing study. Resuscitation. 2016; 105: 130-7.
DÍAZ-NARVÁEZ VP, CALZADILLA-NÚÑEZ A. Artículos científicos, tipos de investigación y productividad científica en las ciencias de la salud. Revista Ciencias de la Salud. 2016; 14(1): 115-21.
FERNANDES MT, ALVES CN. Simulação como metodologia na formação de discentes em enfermagem no estágio final da graduação. Atas de Ciências da Saúde. 2019; 7: 115-25.
GALVÃO CM. Níveis de Evidência. Acta Paulista de Enfermagem. 2006; 19(2): V.
GANONG LH. Integrative reviews of nursing research. Research in Nursing & Health. 1987; 10(1): 1-11.
GRANT VJ, et al. Difficult debriefing situations: A toolbox for simulation educators. Medical Teacher. 2018; 40(7): 703–712.
HALAMEK, LP, et al. Using briefing, simulation and debriefing to improve human and system performance. Seminars in Perinatology. 2019; 43(8): 151178.
HALL K, TORI K. Best practice recommendations for debriefing in simulation-based education for australian undergraduate nursing students: an integrative review. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2017; 13(1): 39-50.
HUSEBØ SE, et al. Reflective practice and its role in simulation. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2015; 11(8): 368-375.
INTERNATIONAL NURSING ASSOCIATION FOR CLINICAL SIMULATION AND LEARNING (INACSL). INACSL Standards Committee. INACSL standards of best practice: SimulationSM simulation-enhanced interprofessional education (sim-IPE). Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2016; 12(S): S34-S38.
KIM JH, et al. Focused and Corrective Feedback Versus Structured and Supported Debriefing in a Simulation-Based Cardiac Arrest Team Training. Simulation in Healthcare. 2017; 12(3): 157-64.
KIM M, KIM S. Debriefing Practices in Simulation-Based Nursing Education in South Korea. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2017; 13: 201-9.
LEE J, et al. Debriefing methods and learning outcomes in simulation nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurse Education Today. 2020; 104345.
MINAYO MC. Sampling and saturation in qualitative research: consensuses and controversies. Revista Pesquisa Qualitativa. 2017; 5(7): 1-12.
MOHER D, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. International Journal of Surgery Open. 2010; 8(5): 336-41.
OUZZANI M, et al. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews. 2016; 5(1): 210.
PALAGANAS JC, et al. Structured debriefing in simulation-based education. AACN Advanced Critical Care. 2016; 27(1): 78-85.
PHRAMPUS PE e O’DONNELL JM. Debriefing using a structured and supported approach. In: LEVINE AI, et al. The Comprehensive Textbook of Healthcare Simulation. New York: Springer Science; 2013. p. 74-7.
RIBEIRO LL, et al. O uso da metodologia ativa como ferramenta de fortalecimento para a segurança do paciente. Revista Eletrônica Acervo Enfermagem. 2021; 8: e4889.
SANTOS CM, et al. A estratégia PICO para a construção da pergunta de pesquisa e busca de evidência. Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem. 2007; 15(3): 508-11.
TYERMAN J, et al. A systematic review of health care presimulation and briefing effectiveness. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2019; 27: 12-25.
URSI ES, GALVÃO CM. Prevenção de lesões de pele no perioperatório: revisão integrativa da literatura. Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem. 2006; 14(1): 124-31.
