International Journal of Healthcare Simulation

Introduction

Simulation has become a backbone of health professions education. The successes of this experiential learning modality have elicited an ample literature base and its own dedicated peer-reviewed journals (e.g. Simulation in Healthcare; Clinical Simulation in Nursing; Advances in Simulation; International Journal of Healthcare Simulation) as well as academic and professional societies (e.g. Society for Simulation in Healthcare; Society in Europe for Simulation as Applied to Medicine; multiple national simulation societies) and their associated scientific conferences. Further, the growth in simulation has prompted numerous health professions education accreditation bodies to require simulation to be implemented in training programs across the globe [1–12].

With the increasing utilization and importance of simulation-based education (SBE), it is critical that effective, data-driven programs exist to train instructors in SBE. Unfortunately, much of the work that has been conducted on faculty development for SBE is constrained to just one topic: debriefing. While the simulation literature clearly highlights the importance and benefits of debriefing in SBE, and outlines guidance for training instructors how to debrief [13–18], this is just one of many critical competencies required to be a successful simulation educator. Unfortunately, little work has been described in the literature on more comprehensive simulation faculty development initiatives that cover a broader array of critical competencies and their effectiveness.

Understanding what interventions and approaches are currently being used to improve the knowledge, skills and effectiveness of instructors in SBE is an integral step for carving out the future of simulation. Knowing what works, when, for whom and why is critical to be able to map the nomological network of SBE and move the field toward. These data can help inform guidelines, recommendations and potential areas for future practice and scholarship.

We conducted a preliminary search of PROSPERO, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the JBI Evidence Synthesis and identified no current or pending scoping reviews or systematic reviews on the topic. Reviews have been published on particular aspects of simulation faculty development for health professions education, most notably debriefing [19–24]. As well, there are other reviews that cover a particular aspect relevant for simulation educators (e.g. assessment) with no particular focus on simulation faculty development for honing and maintaining these skills [25–28]. Still other reviews report on faculty development approaches in health professions education, but without a particular focus on SBE [29–31]. One review on simulation faculty development has been identified, but this review is almost 10 years old and was focused specifically on high-fidelity patient simulation [32].

Scoping reviews can be used to map the field, elucidate what is known and what remains to be investigated, review the levels of evidence in a particular field, outline methodologies used, be inclusive as to types of work considered and identify knowledge and research gaps [33–35]. This review aims to examine and map the existing methodologies, evidence and constructs pertaining to faculty development for SBE, as well as any reports on the effectiveness of these programs. The scoping review approach, in comparison to a systematic review, will allow us to identify all relevant literature regardless of study design [36].

Review question(s)

Our overall question for this review is: What interventions and approaches have been used to date to improve the knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics (KSAOs) of faculty in SBE? Additionally, we aim to map the key features of faculty development in SBE, including main content areas, methodologies and approaches used, program leaders and participants, outcomes assessed, demonstrations of transfer of training, and what conceptual and theoretical frameworks are used to inform the design and evaluation of these programs.

Conceptual framework

Scoping reviews aim to explore the contours and boundaries of knowledge in an emerging field; as such, the research team felt that a conceptual framework [37,38] would help us to organize our thinking about the task, as well as to help us make sense of the literature we hoped to find. This scoping review will use Steinert’s conceptual framework [39], which situates faculty development activities based on two axes: the approach, from formal to informal; and the context for learning, from individual to group. This model provides an organizing framework from which to explore the faculty development approaches present in the literature, as well as to help identify and articulate gaps in the existing literature base (Figure 1). The model has been widely cited in health professions education, and it also resonates with members of the research group: all faculty development programs identified by members of the research group were able to be situated on the matrix identified by the model.

Figure 1:

The organizing conceptual framework for this review is Steinert’s (2010) mapping of faculty development activities, from workshops to communities of practice.

Inclusion criteria

Methods

We will conduct the proposed scoping review in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews [34,35].

Conclusion

We will undertake this scoping review for two primary reasons. Our first goal is to synthesize the existing literature on faculty development for the simulation education community, providing conceptual, theoretical and evidentiary clarity about how to develop and maintain expertise as healthcare simulation educators. Second, and equally important, we aim to identify gaps and areas for future research where a high-quality evidence base is lacking. In this way, we hope that our scoping review will help to define the research agenda for faculty development in simulation education for the coming years.