Title |
How to debrief teamwork interactions: using circular questions to explore and change team interaction patterns
|
---|---|
Published in |
Advances in Simulation, November 2016
|
DOI | 10.1186/s41077-016-0029-7 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Michaela Kolbe, Adrian Marty, Julia Seelandt, Bastian Grande |
Abstract |
We submit that interaction patterns within healthcare teams should be more comprehensively explored during debriefings in simulation-based training because of their importance for clinical performance. We describe howcircular questionscan be used for that purpose. Circular questions are based on social constructivism. They include a variety of systemic interviewing methods. The goals of circular questions are to explore the mutual dependency of team members' behavior and recurrent behavior patterns, to generate information, to foster perspective taking, to "fluidize" problems, and to put actions into relational contexts. We describe the nature of circular questions, the benefits they offer, and ways of applying them during debriefings. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 8 | 23% |
United States | 4 | 11% |
Canada | 4 | 11% |
Saudi Arabia | 2 | 6% |
New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 15 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 24 | 69% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 14% |
Scientists | 4 | 11% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 120 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 20 | 17% |
Other | 13 | 11% |
Researcher | 11 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 7% |
Other | 24 | 20% |
Unknown | 35 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 27% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 14% |
Psychology | 13 | 11% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
Other | 15 | 12% |
Unknown | 39 | 32% |