56 – Simulcast Journal Club Podcast Monthly Wrap June 2018


Welcome to the Simulcast Journal Club Podcast and monthly wrap post.

Please read our pdf summary of the Journal Club article, the month’s discussion and our expert commentary here.

JOURNAL CLUB

Ben and Vic discuss the paper of the month, which provoked controversy about the interplay of feeling and facts in clinical debriefing.

Rose, S. & Cheng, A. (2018). Charge nurse facilitated clinical debriefing in the emergency department.” CJEM, 1-5. doi:10.1017/cem.2018.369.

 

And we talked about a few other sim papers across a range of topics and research methods, including simulation educators’ qualifications and transformative experiences, and sim for improving telephone conversations in healthcare

 

Gardner, Aimee K. et al. Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for Simulation Leaders: The Time Has Come. Journal of Surgical Education, 2018

Dieckmann, M. Birkvad Rasmussen, S. B. Issenberg, E. Søreide, D. Østergaard & C. Ringsted (2018): Long-term experiences of being a simulation-educator: A multinational interview study, Medical Teacher, DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1471204

Walter J. Eppich, Jan-Joost Rethans, Timothy Dornan & Pim W. Teunissen. (2018): Learning how to learn using simulation: Unpacking disguised feedback using a qualitative analysis of doctors’ telephone talk, Medical Teacher, DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1465183

If you’d like to hear more from our expert Liz Crowe on clinical debriefing, check out her podcast on clinical debriefing at St Emlyn’s Blog here.

So we’ll be back with journal club in July – join the discussion

Victoria


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 thoughts on “56 – Simulcast Journal Club Podcast Monthly Wrap June 2018

  • Edward Gomm

    Hi, enjoyed this months discussion. Particularly paper 2 and EPAs for sim educators. The idea of passion alone something I have wrangled with, and particularly how this ties in with recent best practice guidelines (ASPIH) stating faculty should be ” competent at debriefing” amongst other aspirations. We have many willing and passionate but relatively junior faculty who I feel would be put off by rigorous criteria to be allowed to facilitate. Personally I started with only a passion for sim education and feel much of my development in debriefing has been through trial and error with reflection, and crucially by observed debriefing sessions. We are trying to allow our faculty to go through the same process with a peer coaching program whilst delivering a course “at the coalface”. Even if it is a little polluting as Ben says (loved this analogy), the intentions are honest and aspirational, which is all I feel we can expect of our faculty.

    • Ben Symon

      Hi Edward, glad you enjoyed the discussion and thanks for coming along and sharing your thoughts!
      I agree, passion might not be enough, but it starts with passion all the same!
      Ben

  • Aimee Gardner

    Thank you to Simulcast for a nice review and critique.

    The goal of the EPA sim paper wasn’t to promote a barrier to passionate faculty or to create unnecessary burdens for programs searching for simulation instructors. Passion gets you in the door, but there needs to be a path forward if we are to strive for excellence in simulation education, especially once simulation centers become more established. Formal standards and expectations can help. Passion is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for excellence.

    Thanks for the read/listen. 🙂

    • Victoria Brazil Post author

      Hi Aimee

      Thanks so much for dropping by !
      Really appreciate the work you and others are doing on pulling our community forwards, and agree passion necessary but not sufficient !
      Hope we’ll have multiple strategies to strive for excellence and your paper gives us great guidance
      All the best
      Vic