152: Impact of Video-Debriefing Following Simulated Neonatal Resuscitation in Inter-Professional Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simulation and debriefing are increasingly used for both technical and non-technical skills training. Recent national and international guidelines recommend the use of simulation and video-debriefing for neonatal resuscitation training. The use of simulation and video-debriefing create significant challenges for educators in the delivery of standardized programs such as the neonatal resuscitation program (NRP). The effectiveness of this educational strategy remains unclear. To examine the effectiveness of video- debriefing on the performance and beliefs of inter-professional teams following simulated neonatal training sessions. This REB-approved prospective study examined the role of video-debriefing in improving neonatal resuscitation performance amongst neonatal teams in both technical and non-technical skills. Teams included one of: respiratory therapists (RT), neonatal nurse and senior paediatric residents. Two standardized simulated neonatal resuscitation scenarios were offered using a high-fidelity simulation environment. Neonatal teams were randomly allocated to receive video-debriefing or no debriefing after the initial simulated neonatal resuscitation and invited for a subsequent session four to eight weeks later. Participants were assessed for NRP team performance by reviewers blinded to the intervention. Attitudes and beliefs of participants were collected regarding the use of debriefing for resuscitation and team behavioural skills. A total of 25 study teams were recruited comprising 75 participants. Seventeen groups have returned to complete the study. The majority of participants (53%) had attended less than five simulations in the past. Of those who had previously attended, the vast majority had never been exposed to video-debriefing as part of their education. There were no significant differences in NRP performance (time to intubation and NRP score) between groups. In general, adherence to NRP guidelines was poor. Virtually all participants agreed that both the simulation and debriefing components resulted in improved learning in both technical and team behavioural skills. A greater number of participants strongly agreed that the simulation session assisted their acquisition of team behavioural skills (P=0.006). In this study, the use of video-debriefing Inter-professional teams of simulated neonatal resuscitations did not result in significant improvement in subsequent simulated NRP performance. Team members believed the use of both simulation and debriefing resulted in enhanced acquisition of team behavioural skills in particular. The role of inter-professional team training using video-debriefing in this setting requires further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".