What do you feel went well in this simulation? Why?
The simulation presented in the video was organized quite well, and both the participants were realistic enough (RHIC Simulation Center, 2018). The way of presenting the main characters is important; they both were shown not as ideal characters but as quite natural people with usual intonation and manner of behavior. The medical worker in the video conducted all necessary preparatory procedures, such as initial examination, checking of temperature, pulse, and respiration (RHIC Simulation Center, 2018). Also, the inspection itself was carried out by the nursing ethics.
The employee was polite and courteous, she had an open dialogue with the patient and showed interest in the problem. All the data of the survey were recorded in the medical history, which is also the right measure. In addition to the questions directly about the problem, the medical worker asked about other attendant factors that are also essential; they include allergic reactions to certain drugs, a tendency to smoke and drink alcohol, weight, etc. Also, the nurse allowed the visitor to enter, which was also the manifestation of politeness and understanding. When the patient had a vomiting attack, the nurse was nearby and took all necessary measures. Therefore, the simulation went well, and the truthfulness of the procedures is beyond any doubt.
Is there anything that you would have done differently? Why?
The validity of the nurse’s actions is unlikely to cause mistrust. However, some points could have been done a little differently. For example, when the patient was questioned, additional information could have been found. The data about chronic and hereditary diseases, perhaps, would have been of some clinical use and could have helped in diagnosing. Also, as Dreifuerst (2009) remarks, debriefing after reviewed simulations should be associated directly with the clinical case. If fewer details had been included in the video, it could have been possible to focus on the video in more detail and take into account only the case of the patient rather than other attendant events, such as the visitor’s arrival (RHIC Simulation Center, 2018). Some additional questions arise in the assessment process. For instance, why does an emergency brigade works so slowly? How long does it take to diagnose? Despite these questions, the simulation was performed quite plausibly, and corresponding conclusions can be made based on its results.
What have you learned from this simulation that will help in your future practice?
This modeling can certainly be of some use in planning further work and practice in any healthcare institution. Interacting with the patient is shown at a sufficiently high level, and, despite some remaining questions, the entire algorithm of the nurse’s actions on the video is quite logical and correct (RHIC Simulation Center, 2018). The inspection procedure can be used as a sample. The example of the medical specialist’s communication with the patient is quite good, and this style can be applied in personal nursing practice. According to Dreifuerst (2009), one of the goals of debriefing is to immerse students in a specific situation for practical training and taking some experience. The analysis of such a simulation allows competently assessing all the discussed topics and evaluating the quality of performed work. The opportunity to reconsider some disputed points several times is certainly a plus. Therefore, based on the received data, it can be noted that much useful information can be drawn from this fragment, and this knowledge can be an additional way to improve personal skills as a professional.
References
Dreifuerst, K. T. (2009). The essential of debriefing in simulation learning: A concept analysis. Nursing Education Perspectives, 30(2), 109-114.
RHIC Simulation Center (2018). Day of Care – 2017 [Video file]. Web.