Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Dec 31;15(12):e0244816.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244816. eCollection 2020.

Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD) in simulation-based medical education: Translation and validation of the German version

Affiliations

Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD) in simulation-based medical education: Translation and validation of the German version

Sandra Abegglen et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Debriefing is essential for effective learning during simulation-based medical education. To assess the quality of debriefings, reliable and validated tools are necessary. One widely used validated tool is the Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing (OSAD), which was originally developed in English. The aim of this study was to translate the OSAD into German, and to evaluate the reliability and validity of this German version (G-OSAD) according the 'Standards of Educational and Psychological Measurement'. In Phase 1, the validity evidence based on content was established by a multistage cross-cultural adaptation translation of the original English OSAD. Additionally, we collected expert input on the adequacy of the content of the G-OSAD to measure debriefing quality. In Phase 2, three trained raters assessed 57 video recorded debriefings to gather validity evidence based on internal structure. Interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and composite reliability were examined. Finally, we assessed the internal structure by applying confirmatory factorial analysis. The expert input supported the adequacy of the content of the G-OSAD to measure debriefing quality. Interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) was excellent for the average ratings (three raters: ICC = 0.848; two raters: ICC = 0.790), and good for the single rater (ICC = 0.650). Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.976), internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's α = 0.865), and composite reliability was excellent (ω = 0.93). Factor analyses supported the unidimensionality of the G-OSAD, which indicates that these G-OSAD ratings measure debriefing quality as intended. The G-OSAD shows good psychometric qualities to assess debriefing quality, which are comparable to the original OSAD. Thus, this G-OSAD is a tool that has the potential to optimise the quality of debriefings in German-speaking countries.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Factor structure of the G-OSAD.
Full model and standardised parameter estimates. Rectangles, observed variables; oval, latent construct. The paths from the latent construct to the observed variables indicate the standardised loading (β) of each variable. The arrows to the observed variables (left) indicate the measurement errors (ε). The category of ‘establishes learning environment’ was not assessed because it was not part of the video recordings of the debriefings, and therefore it was excluded.

References

    1. Ziv A, Wolpe PR, Small SD, Glick S. Simulation-based medical education: an ethical imperative. Simul Healthc. 2006;1: 252–256. 10.1097/01.SIH.0000242724.08501.63 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;306: 978–988. 10.1001/jama.2011.1234 - DOI - PubMed
    1. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen MER, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Acad Med. 2011;86: 706–711. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318217e119 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boet S, Bould MD, Fung L, Qosa H, Perrier L, Tavares W, et al. Transfer of learning and patient outcome in simulated crisis resource management: a systematic review. Can J Anaesth. 2014;61: 571–582. 10.1007/s12630-014-0143-8 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fanning RM, Gaba DM. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc. 2007;2: 115–125. 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3180315539 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types