Effects of peer-led debriefing using simulation with case-based learning: Written vs. observed debriefing

Background: Peer-led written debriefing (PLWD) and peer-led observed debriefing (PLOD) are types of peer-led debriefing. Despite their advantages, these methods are sparingly used among debriefing experts.

Objective: To identify effects of peer-led debriefing (written versus observed) using simulation with case-based learning (CBL) and compare levels of satisfaction with CBL, debriefing, and simulation-based learning (SBL) between the two groups.

Design: Quasi-experimental study used a pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group.

Setting: Department of Nursing in C province, South Korea.

Participants: Sixty-nine third-year undergraduate nursing students (PLWD, n = 33; PLOD, n = 36).

Methods: Differences in clinical performance competency, and satisfaction of CBL, SBL, and debriefing between the PLWD and PLOD groups were determined.

Results: Clinical performance competency scores of posttest in both the PLWD and PLOD groups were significantly higher than those of pretest. There were no significant differences in any item except for item of 'communication' (t = -2.150, p = .047) between the PLWD and PLOD groups. There were no significant differences in satisfaction with CBL (t = -0.874, p = .385), simulation (t = -0.701, p = .485), or debriefing (t = -1.024, p = .309) between the two groups.

Conclusion: This study suggests that both the PLWD and PLOD could be used to achieve students' learning outcomes when debriefing experts are unavailable.