IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v19y2017i4p485-491.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Survey of factors influencing learner engagement with simulation debriefing among nursing students

Author

Listed:
  • Young Sook Roh
  • Kie In Jang

Abstract

Simulation‐based education has escalated worldwide, yet few studies have rigorously explored predictors of learner engagement with simulation debriefing. The purpose of this cross‐sectional, descriptive survey was to identify factors that determine learner engagement with simulation debriefing among nursing students. A convenience sample of 296 Korean nursing students enrolled in the simulation‐based course completed the survey. A total of five instruments were used: (i) Characteristics of Debriefing; (ii) Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare – Student Version; (iii) The Korean version of the Simulation Design Scale; (iv) Communication Skills Scale; and (v) Clinical‐Based Stress Scale. Multiple regression analysis was performed using the variables to investigate the influencing factors. The results indicated that influencing factors of learning engagement with simulation debriefing were simulation design, confidentiality, stress, and number of students. Simulation design was the most important factor. Video‐assisted debriefing was not a significant factor affecting learner engagement. Educators should organize and conduct debriefing activities while considering these factors to effectively induce learner engagement. Further study is needed to identify the effects of debriefing sessions targeting learners' needs and considering situational factors on learning outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Young Sook Roh & Kie In Jang, 2017. "Survey of factors influencing learner engagement with simulation debriefing among nursing students," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 485-491, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:19:y:2017:i:4:p:485-491
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12371
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12371?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ashley K. Kable & Carol Arthur & Tracy Levett‐Jones & Kerry Reid‐Searl, 2013. "Student evaluation of simulation in undergraduate nursing programs in Australia using quality indicators," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(2), pages 235-243, June.
    2. Young Sook Roh & Michelle Kelly & Eun Ho Ha, 2016. "Comparison of instructor‐led versus peer‐led debriefing in nursing students," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 238-245, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Randi Tosterud & Kristin Kjølberg & Arnhild Vestnes Kongshaug & Jon Viktor Haugom, 2020. "Exploration of Two Different Structures for Debriefing in Simulation: The Influence of the Structure on the Facilitator Role," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(2), pages 243-257, April.
    2. Angelo Dante & Carmen La Cerra & Valeria Caponnetto & Vittorio Masotta & Alessia Marcotullio & Luca Bertocchi & Fabio Ferraiuolo & Cristina Petrucci & Loreto Lancia, 2022. "Dose–Response Relationship between High-Fidelity Simulation and Intensive Care Nursing Students’ Learning Outcomes: An Italian Multimethod Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Jon Viktor Haugom & Solveig Struksnes, 2024. "Can Facilitators’ Need for Control Influence Students’ Learning Experience through Simulation? - A Qualitative Study on Simulation in Nursing Education," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 55(1), pages 109-127, February.
    4. Myung‐Nam Lee & Shin‐Jeong Kim & Kyung‐Ah Kang & Sunghee Kim, 2020. "Comparing the learning effects of debriefing modalities for the care of premature infants," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 243-253, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pauline Catherine Gillan & Pamela van der Riet & Sarah Jeong, 2016. "Australian nursing students' stories of end‐of‐life care simulation," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 64-69, March.
    2. Young Sook Roh & Sang Suk Kim & Sung Hee Kim, 2014. "Effects of an integrated problem‐based learning and simulation course for nursing students," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 91-96, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:19:y:2017:i:4:p:485-491. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-2018 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.