scholarly journals Clinical Instructors' Perspectives on the Clinical Education of Internationally Educated Physical Therapists: Diversity's Impact on the Experience

2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-80
Author(s):  
Laura Tambosso ◽  
Christine Manning ◽  
Tuen Mun Ong ◽  
Rebecca Zacharchuk ◽  
Jessica James ◽  
...  
2003 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 291-297
Author(s):  
Eli Carmeli

Action research (AR) has an important role to play in educating physical therapists. Increasing efforts should be encouraged to instigate AR programs in physical therapy practice and clinical education. Such programs commonly require considerable effort and understanding by clinical instructors, and require adoption of new educational methods. AR programs can lead physical therapists and clinicians to be more questioning and reflective in evaluating practical questions regarding patient therapy and education. The purpose of this article is to educate the readers on the importance of AR and to provide a few relevant references on that topic. A specific study is described in this paper in which physical therapy clinical instructors participated in a structured workshop designed to demonstrate the values of AR and how such values can be incorporated in teaching their students. AR can lead to improved therapist-patient interaction and help solve specific practical problems arising during therapy sessions.


Author(s):  
Debra Bierwas ◽  
Joan Leafman ◽  
Lisa Wallace ◽  
Donald Shaw ◽  
Steven Fehrer

Introduction: Evidence-based practice is a required component of student physical therapist education. Practice applying the five steps of evidence-based practice to patient care (formulate question, retrieve evidence, appraise evidence, integrate evidence, evaluate outcomes), most effectively performed during clinical education, must occur for students to become proficient. Clinical instructor use of evidence-based practice is essential to assure that student physical therapist practice occurs during clinical education. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess self-reported evidence-based practice use by physical therapy clinical instructors and examine whether an association exists between professional characteristics and evidence-based practice use. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional, descriptive study using an electronic survey to collect data on clinical instructor professional characteristics and evidence-based practice use. Results: Respondents included 376 physical therapists who were clinical instructors in the United States. Participant responses for frequency evidence-based practice steps use ranged from never to frequently. Specifically, respondents reported integrating evidence into clinical instruction: never 2.1% (n = 8); rarely 6.4% (n = 24); occasionally 13.3% (n = 50); sometimes 28.7% (n = 108); and frequently 49.5% (n = 186). There was no difference in evidence-based practice use as the result of age or highest degree. Respondents who were American Physical Therapy Association members or held an American Board of Physical Therapy Specialties certification reported using some of the evidence-based practice steps more frequently than those who were not. Discussion and Conclusion: Although the majority of respondents in this study reported using evidence-based practice to some extent, there was great variability. Student physical therapists may be exposed to evidence-based practice during clinical education since the majority of respondents, considering their role as clinical instructors, reported evidence-based practice use. However, exposure cannot be guaranteed for every student because some respondents reported never using evidence-based practice. Educational program use of supplemental learning activities during clinical experiences may facilitate student practice of all five steps of evidence-based practice during clinical education.


2002 ◽  
Vol 82 (12) ◽  
pp. 1192-1200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ethel M Frese ◽  
Randy R Richter ◽  
Tamara V Burlis

Abstract Background and Purpose. The Guide to Physical Therapist Practice (Guide) recommends that heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) measurement be included in the examination of new patients. The purpose of this study was to survey physical therapy clinical instructors to determine the frequency of HR and BP measurement in new patients and in patients already on the physical therapists' caseload. The use of information obtained from HR and BP measures in decision making for patient care and the effects of practice setting and academic preparation on the measurement and use of HR and BP also were examined. Subjects and Methods. A sample of 597 subjects was selected from a list of 2,663 clinical instructors at the clinical education sites of the 2 participating universities. Clinical instructors from a variety of practice settings were surveyed. A 26-item survey questionnaire was mailed to the clinical instructors. Results. Usable survey questionnaires were received from 387 respondents (64.8%); 43.4% reported working in an outpatient facility. The majority of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed (59.5%) that measurement of HR and BP should be included in physical therapy screening. When asked if routinely measuring HR and BP during clinical practice is essential, opinions were nearly split (strongly agree or agree=45.0%, strongly disagree or disagree=43.7%, no opinion=11.3%). More than one third (38.0%) of the respondents reported never measuring HR in the week before the survey as part of their examination of new patients. A slightly larger percentage (43.0%) reported never measuring BP of new patients in the week before the survey. Conversely, 6.0% and 4.4% of the respondents reported always measuring HR and BP, respectively, of new patients in the week before the survey. When given a list of reasons why HR and BP were not routinely measured in their clinical practice, respondents most frequently chose “not important for my patient population” (52.3%). Relationships were found between practice setting and frequency of HR and BP measurement in new patients. Discussion and Conclusion. Practices related to HR and BP measurement reported by this sample of clinical instructors do not meet the recommendations for physical therapy care described in the Guide.


2020 ◽  
pp. e20190067
Author(s):  
Michael E. Kalu ◽  
Sharon Switzer-Mclntrye ◽  
Martine Quesnel ◽  
Catherine Donnelly ◽  
Kathleen E. Norman

Physiotherapy ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 100 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
B.H. Greenfield ◽  
P.H. Bridges ◽  
T.A. Phillips ◽  
A.N. Drill ◽  
C.D. Gaydosik ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Pradeep Vanguri ◽  
Jeff Konin

Athletic training clinical education combines didactic education with practical experiences. Athletic training education programs facilitate the development of this instruction by preparing the clinical instructors affiliated with the program. Primarily through one-time workshops, this effort provides limited delivery of content to prepare these clinical instructors. In an attempt to identify which method of content delivery would most benefit clinical instructors, this research creates a unique methods to further investigate this issue. This study compared the acquisition of knowledge between the traditional single session clinical instructor workshop to a modified four-session workshop on athletic training clinical education instructional strategies. Method: A pre-post assessment was utilized to measure the acquisition of clinical instruction skills for a control and experimental group of clinical instructors within a single accredited athletic training education program. Eleven clinical instructors participated in the experimental group while fifteen clinical instructors participated in the control group (N=26). A standardized instrument for assessment compared control and experimental group participants’ acquisition of information delivered through the clinical workshop models. Results:Statistical analysis of the results from the testing instrument identified a statistical difference (p=.003) between the control and experimental groups implying an acquisition of knowledge from the clinical instructor workshop interventions.Conclusions: This study supports the implementation of multiple session clinical workshops for athletic training clinical instructor workshop training as an alternative method to the traditional single session workshop delivery mode. Nurturing clinical instructors through instructional develops a positive learning environment to ensure their success.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document