Aims and objectivesTo synthesise and map the literature on the psychological outcomes reported following debriefing of healthcare providers who experience expected and unexpected patient death in either clinical practice or simulation setting.BackgroundPatient death occurs in both the clinical and simulation environments and can result in psychological stress in healthcare providers and students. While debriefing following patient death has demonstrated the ability to promote positive psychological outcomes, addressing the psychological or emotional stress of the event is inconsistently addressed.DesignA scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework.MethodThe Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, JBI and Scopus databases were searched with English language constraints and no limit on publication date. The Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐ScR) Checklist was used (Annals of Internal Medicine, 2018, 169, 467) (see Appendix S1).ResultsEighteen articles (16 research papers and 2 review papers) met the inclusion criteria. Of the 16 research papers, 9 reported on debriefing models in the simulation environment and 7 in the clinical setting. The types of debriefing models found in the simulation setting tended to focus on healthcare providers' learning, while those in the clinical setting typically focused on healthcare providers' emotional reactions and resulted in positive psychological effects.ConclusionDebriefing has the potential to positively affect psychological outcomes of healthcare providers who experience patient death. The type of debriefing that is selected is a key component to achieving these positive outcomes.Relevance to Clinical PracticeThis scoping review identified the debriefing frameworks used in both simulation and clinical environments following patient death events, and any associated psychological outcomes. There is a need for debriefing to occur after each death in either environment; however, there is a lack of evidence‐based debriefing frameworks that can be used in both the clinical and simulation environments to promote positive psychological outcomes.
BackgroundLifestyle counseling is described as a “major breakthrough” in the control of chronic diseases. Counseling can be challenging to nurses due their lack of motivation to counsel, hesitancy to appear non-judgmental, lack of empathy, and lack of time. Nurses voice their need for more training in counseling communication skills. Our main objective was to engage in ongoing development and testing of a promising Heart Health Whispering perspective-taking intervention on nursing students’ clinical empathy, perceptual understanding, and client readiness to alter health risk behaviors.MethodsIn this randomized controlled pilot study, the full intervention (perspective-taking instructions, practice, and video-feedback) and partial intervention (video-feedback only) comprised 24 and 18 nursing students, respectively. Quantitative data were collected with a 10-item pre- and post-intervention clinical empathy tool, a one-item ‘readiness to change’ health risk behavior tool plus similarity ratings on students’ empathic accuracy were calculated. Data were analyzed using Independent Samples t Tests and mixed model ANCOVA models. Students’ and actors’ evaluative responses toward the intervention phases were collected by handwritten notes, and analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison techniques.ResultsThe main finding was that students in the full intervention group reported greater clinical empathy in the post versus baseline condition. Students underestimated their clinical empathy in comparison to carers’ reports in the post-condition. In both intervention groups, carers reported more readiness to change in the post-condition. Carers identified favorable and unfavorable perceptions and outcomes of approaches taken by students. Students desired immediate and direct feedback after the video-dialogue and -tagging exercise.ConclusionsHeart Health Whispering is a promising intervention to help educators in basic and continuing education to bolster nurse confidence in empathic conversations on health risk behaviors. This intervention incorporates commonly used strategies to teach empathic communication along with a novel video-analysis application of a perspective-taking task. Student and carer actor comments highlighted the value in opportunities for students to engage in self-evaluation and practicing the empathic process of taking the client’s perspective on health risk behaviors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12912-018-0291-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Criminal justice reforms and corrections cost forecasts require appropriate estimates of the marginal costs of incarceration to adequately assess cost savings and projections. Average costs are simple to calculate while marginal cost calculations require much more detailed data and advanced methods. We undertook a scoping review to identify, report, and summarize the existing academic and gray literature covering the different estimation methods of calculating the marginal costs of incarceration, following the Arksey and O’Malley framework. Eighteen publications met criteria for inclusion in this review, with only one from the peer-reviewed literature. The three main approaches in the literature and their use are reviewed and illustrated. We conclude that there is a lack of, and need for, peer-reviewed literature on methods for calculating the marginal cost of incarceration, and marginal cost estimates of incarceration, to assist program evaluation, policy, and cost forecasting in the field of corrections.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.