SİMÜLASYONA DAYALI ÖĞRENMEDE “ÇÖZÜMLEME DENEYİM ÖLÇEĞİ”NİN TÜRKÇE VERSİYONUNUN GEÇERLİK GÜVENİRLİĞİ

Year 2022, Volume: 5 Issue: 2, 480 - 494, 30.09.2022

Yasemin Uslu , Hilal Tüzer , Tülay Başak , Vildan Kocatepe , Merve Kanığ , Vesile Ünver , Ükke Karabacak , Bahar İnkaya , Tuba Yılmazer

https://doi.org/10.52538/iduhes.1151559

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Simülasyona dayalı öğretimin en önemli aşaması “Çözümleme”dir. Çözümleme oturumunda ana hedef katılımcının kendi performanslarını gözden geçirmeleri ve simülasyon sırasında elde ettikleri kazanımlarının farkına varmalarıdır. Bu çalışma “Çözümleme Deneyim Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Geçerlik Güvenirliği” ni yapmak amacıyla metodolojik olarak yapıldı. Çalışmanın evrenini 2017-2018 yılında İstanbul’da bulunan bir üniversitenin hemşirelik bölümünde öğrenim gören öğrenciler (N=303) oluşturdu. Çözümleme Deneyim Ölçeğinin içerik geçerliliği, yapı geçerliliği, iç tutarlılık güvenilirliği test edildi. Ölçeğin total Cronbach alfa düzeyi “Çözümleme Deneyimi” için 0.948 olup, “Maddelerin Önemi” için ise 0.951’dır. Test-tekrar test sınıf içi korelasyon katsayısı (ICC) 0,999 idi (p<0,001). Çözümleme Deneyim Ölçeği’nin Türkçe versiyonu Türk toplumundaki öğrencilerde kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçektir.

Keywords

Simülasyon, Hemşirelik eğitimi, Çözümleme, Çözümleme deneyim ölçeği, Hasta simülasyonu

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE TURKISH VERSION OF “DEBRIEFING EXPERIENCE SCALE” IN SIMULATION-BASED LEARNING

Abstract

The most important phase of simulation-based learning is “debriefing”. The main purpose of a debriefing session is to have participants review their own performances and identify the attainments they achieved during the simulation. This study performed the validity and reliability test of the Turkish version of the “Debriefing Experience Scale”. The universe of the study consisted of students (N=303) from the Nursing Department of a university during the 2017–2018 academic year. Content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency reliability of the Debriefing Experience Scale were tested. The Cronbach’s alpha level of the scale was found to be 0.948 for “Experience with Debriefing” and 0.951 for “Importance of item”. The test-retest intraclass coefficient (ICC) was 0.999 (p<0.001). The Turkish version of the Debriefing Experience Scale is a valid and reliable scale and can be applied to students in Turkish Society.

Keywords

Simulation, Nursing education, Debriefing, Debriefing experience scale, Patient simulation.

References

• Alderman, J. (2012). Using simulation to teach nursing students and licensed clinicians obstetric emergencies. The American Journal of Maternal/Child Nursing, 37(6), 394-400. https://doi.org/ 10.1097/NMC.0b013e318264bbe7.
• Ayre, C., & Scally, A. J. (2014). Critical Values for Lawshe’s Content Validity Ratio: Revisiting the Original Methods of Calculation. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 47(1), 79-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175613513808.
• Burns, N., & Groves, K. (2003). Practice of nursing research (3th edition ed.): WB. Saunders Company, USA.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Statistics, Research Design, Spss Applications and Interpretation. In Data Analysis Handbook for Sciences. (pp. 100-350). Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing.
• Cantrell, M. A. (2008). The importance of debriefing in clinical simulations. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 4(2), e19-e23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2008.06.006.
• Chronister, C., & Brown, D. (2012). Comparison of simulation debriefing methods. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 8(7), e281-e288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2010.12.005.
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Multivariate Statistics for Social Sciences: SPSS and Lisrel Applications. (2nd edt ed.). Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing.
• Decker, S., Sportsman, S., Puetz, L., & Billings, L. (2008). The evolution of simulation and its contribution to competency. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 39(2), 74-80. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20080201-06.
• dos Santos Almeida, R., Mazzo, A., Amado Martins, J. C., Dias Coutinho, V. R., Jorge, B. M., & Costa Mendes, I. A. (2016). Validation to Portuguese of the Debriefing Experience Scale. Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 69(4), 658-664. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167.2016690413i
• Dreifuerst, K. T. (2012). Using debriefing for meaningful learning to foster development of clinical reasoning in simulation. Journal of Nursing Education, 51(6), 326-333. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20120409-02.
• Eppich, W., & Cheng, A. (2015). Promoting excellence and reflective learning in simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simulation in Healthcare, 10(2), 106-115. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000072.
• Esin, M. N. (2014). Data Collection Methods and Tools & Reliability and Validity of Data Collection Tools. In S. Erdoğan, N. Nahcivan, & M. N. Esin (Eds.), Nursing Research. İstanbul: Nobel Medical Bookstores.
• Harder, B. N. (2009). Evolution of simulation use in health care education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 5(5), 169-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2009.04.092.
• Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory Factor Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
• INACSL Standards Committee. (2016). INACSL Standards of Best Practice: Simulation SM Simulation Glossary. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 12, 39-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2016.09.012.
• Karagöz, Y. (2014). SPSS 21.1 Applied Biostatistics. Ankra: Nobel Academic Publishing.
• Oudshoorn, A., & Sinclair, B. (2015). Using unfolding simulations to teach mental health concepts in undergraduate nursing education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 11(9), 396-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.05.011.
• Reed, S. J. (2012). Debriefing experience scale: Development of a tool to evaluate the student learning experience in debriefing. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 8(6), e211-e217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2011.11.002
• Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Dufresne, R. L., & Raemer, D. B. (2006). There's no such thing as “nonjudgmental” debriefing: a theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simulation in Healthcare, 1(1), 49-55.
• Sanner-Stiehr, E. (2017). Using simulation to teach responses to lateral violence: guidelines for nurse educators. Nurse Educator, 42(3), 133-137. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000326.
• Sönmez, V. (2005). Mistakes in scientific research. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (EJER)(18), 150-173.
• Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve Davranışsal Ölçümlerde Güvenilirlik ve Geçerlik. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Tezbaşaran, A. A. (2008). Likert Type Scale Preparation Guide: Online Book.
• Tosterud, R., Wangensteen, S., Petzäll, K., & Hall-Lord, M. L. (2015). Cross-cultural validation and psychometric testing of the questionnaire: Debriefing experience scale. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 11(1), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2014.09.011.
• Ulrich, B., & Mancini, B. (2014). Mastering Simulation. A Handbook for Success. Sigma Theta Tau International, Indianapolis Yurdugül, H. (2005). Using scope validity indices for scope validity in scale development studies. XIV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, 1, 771-774.