Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRoh, Y.
dc.contributor.authorKelly, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorHa, E.
dc.date.accessioned2017-01-30T12:25:40Z
dc.date.available2017-01-30T12:25:40Z
dc.date.created2016-03-30T19:30:18Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationRoh, Y. and Kelly, M. and Ha, E. 2016. Comparison of instructor-led versus peer-led debriefing in nursing students. Nursing and Health Sciences. 18 (2): pp. 238-245.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/21527
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/nhs.12259
dc.description.abstract

Despite its widespread support, the most effective simulation-based debriefing method has little evidence to support its efficacy. In this study, we compared the effect of peer-led and instructor-led debriefing among nursing students. The study was conducted with a non-equivalent control group using a pretest-post-test design. A convenience sample of third-year nursing students was used for the study, where 65 students enrolled in a 2-week clinical placement rotation were randomly assigned to the instructor-led group or peer-led group. The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills, satisfaction with simulation, and quality of debriefing in the peer-led group were compared to those in the instructor-led group. Group differences at each testing interval were analyzed using independent t-test. Nursing students in the instructor-led debriefing group showed better subsequent cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance, more satisfaction with simulation experience, and higher debriefing scores compared to the peer-led group. From our study, instructor-led debriefing is an effective method in improving skills performance, inducing favorable satisfaction, and providing better quality of debriefing among nursing students. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing Asia
dc.titleComparison of instructor-led versus peer-led debriefing in nursing students
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.source.issn1441-0745
dcterms.source.titleNursing and Health Sciences
curtin.note

This is the peer reviewed version of the following article, which has been published in final form at http://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12259. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving at http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-820227.html#terms

curtin.departmentSchool of Nursing and Midwifery
curtin.accessStatusOpen access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record