4.3 Article

A Nursing Simulation Pilot Study Comparing Art-Enhanced Debriefing and Traditional Debriefing

Journal

CLINICAL SIMULATION IN NURSING
Volume 67, Issue -, Pages 49-57

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecns.2022.02.014

Keywords

art; art-based learning; art-enhanced; debriefing; art-cards; simulation; nursing students; prelicensure; undergraduate; research; mixed methods study

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the use of art-cards to assist nursing students in reflecting on their clinical learning. The results showed that using pictures led to an increased number of words spoken by the students and three themes emerged: channeling feelings, making sense, and becoming. This suggests that the use of pictures or art-cards may enhance students' self-reflection during debriefing.
Background: The use of pictures or art-cards during debriefing may help deepen self-reflection and add a new unexplored dimension to simulation.Purpose: This study evaluated the use of art-cards (various interesting pictures attached to 6 x 8 file cards) to help nursing students with their reflections on their clinical take home learning. Research questions addressed the differences in the number of words and the kinds of words used when students debriefed with and without art cards.Methods: A quasi-experimental mixed methods cross over design was used for this study. A convenience sample of 42 students serving as their own controls participated in two medical surgical simulation scenarios; one scenario was conducted with debriefing in the traditional manner and the other after choosing an art card to depict their feelings. All scenarios were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim.Results: There was a significant increase in the number of words spoken when using pictures. Three themes were identified in the students' words when pictures were used: channeling feelings, making sense, and becoming.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available