Search

Simulation debriefing standards and models recommend simulation facilitators spend time debriefing learner feelings and clinical reasoning following the simulation scenario. Many debriefing models are available, more so in nursing than in paramedicine, however few models combine specific frameworks to debrief learner feelings and unpack cognitive decisions. The Two Phase Debrief model was designed to support debriefers to spend equal amounts of time debriefing learner felt reactions and clinical decision making, guided by specific tools and skills for each phase. Australian nursing and paramedicine students (n = 19) and academics (n = 9) evaluated the Two Phase Debrief model using a qualitative descriptive design. Analysis of focus group data revealed three themes: Valuing time for debrief, Valuing skills for debrief and Valuing emotions. Across the two disciplines, academics agreed learners would benefit from debriefing using Two Phase Debrief model but considered time a barrier. Nursing and paramedicine students felt the equal time spent exploring emotions and clinical reasoning contributed to a positive learning experience and that expert debriefers may not need disciplinary specific content knowledge. These and other findings discussed indicate there is more work needed to understand the appetite for and required skills of expert cross disciplinary simulation debriefing teams., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Advancing the clinical trial research process to improve cancer treatment necessitates helping people with cancer identify and enroll in studies, and researchers are using the power of the Internet to facilitate this process. This study used a content analysis of online cancer clinical trial search tools to understand what people with cancer might encounter. The content analysis revealed that clinical trial search tools were easy to identify using a popular search engine, but their functionality and content varied greatly. Most required that users be fairly knowledgeable about their medical condition and sophisticated in their web navigation skills. The ability to search by a specific health condition or type of cancer was the most common search strategy. The more complex tools required that users input detailed information about their personal medical history and have knowledge of specific clinical trial terminology. Search tools, however, only occasionally advised users to consult their doctors regarding clinical trial decision-making. This, along with the complexity of the tools suggests that online search tools may not adequately facilitate the clinical trial recruitment process. Findings from this analysis can be used as a framework from which to systematically examine actual consumer experience with online clinical trial search tools.

The aim of this study was to identify and quantify gaps in health care data for American Indians and Alaska Natives. Findings indicate that only 42% of measures of health care quality and access tracked in the National Healthcare Disparities Report could be used to assess disparities among American Indians and Alaska Natives. Patient safety data was especially limited. Data from American Indians and Alaska Natives need to be improved to allow better targeting of interventions to reduce health care disparities and monitoring the success of these activities.