Musculoskeletal anatomy core syllabus for Australian chiropractic programs: A pilot study.

Rosemary Giuriato BSc, G. Štrkalj, T. Prvan, N. Pather
{"title":"Musculoskeletal anatomy core syllabus for Australian chiropractic programs: A pilot study.","authors":"Rosemary Giuriato BSc, G. Štrkalj, T. Prvan, N. Pather","doi":"10.7899/JCE-21-18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nThe aim of this study is to conduct a pilot survey to determine core anatomy content for chiropractic curriculum based on the perception of chiropractors and anatomy educators involved in teaching in an Australian chiropractic program.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA survey of anatomical structures previously used in a medical survey, with similar criteria for synthesizing responses, was used and classified according to whether the respondents rated an item as essential, important, acceptable, or not required in a chiropractic program. The item was scored as core if ≥60% of respondents rated it essential, recommended if 30%-59% rated it essential, not recommended if 20%-29% rated it essential, or not core if <20% rated it essential.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe respondents rated 81.6% of all musculoskeletal concepts as core and 18.4% as recommended, 88.8% of the vertebral column items as core, and 11.2% of the items as recommended, 69.4% upper limb and pectoral girdle items as core, 23.7% of items as recommended, 5.5% as not recommended and 1.3% as not core items for inclusion, 85.3% of all lower limb and pelvic girdle items as core, 14.4% as recommended and 0.3% not recommended.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nChiropractors and anatomists involved in teaching in an Australian chiropractic program rated most musculoskeletal items as essential for inclusion in a chiropractic teaching program to ensure adequate preparation for safe practice and to promote alignment with the standards of anatomy education delivered into the clinical professions.","PeriodicalId":214673,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of chiropractic education","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of chiropractic education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7899/JCE-21-18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to conduct a pilot survey to determine core anatomy content for chiropractic curriculum based on the perception of chiropractors and anatomy educators involved in teaching in an Australian chiropractic program. METHODS A survey of anatomical structures previously used in a medical survey, with similar criteria for synthesizing responses, was used and classified according to whether the respondents rated an item as essential, important, acceptable, or not required in a chiropractic program. The item was scored as core if ≥60% of respondents rated it essential, recommended if 30%-59% rated it essential, not recommended if 20%-29% rated it essential, or not core if <20% rated it essential. RESULTS The respondents rated 81.6% of all musculoskeletal concepts as core and 18.4% as recommended, 88.8% of the vertebral column items as core, and 11.2% of the items as recommended, 69.4% upper limb and pectoral girdle items as core, 23.7% of items as recommended, 5.5% as not recommended and 1.3% as not core items for inclusion, 85.3% of all lower limb and pelvic girdle items as core, 14.4% as recommended and 0.3% not recommended. CONCLUSION Chiropractors and anatomists involved in teaching in an Australian chiropractic program rated most musculoskeletal items as essential for inclusion in a chiropractic teaching program to ensure adequate preparation for safe practice and to promote alignment with the standards of anatomy education delivered into the clinical professions.
肌肉骨骼解剖学核心大纲为澳大利亚脊椎指压治疗方案:试点研究。
目的本研究的目的是进行一项试点调查,以确定脊椎指压疗法课程的核心解剖学内容,该调查基于参与澳大利亚脊椎指压疗法课程教学的脊椎指压治疗师和解剖学教育者的感知。方法对以前在医学调查中使用的解剖结构进行调查,并采用类似的综合反应标准,根据受访者对脊椎指压治疗项目中必要、重要、可接受或不需要的项目进行分类。≥60%的被调查者认为该项目是必要的,30%-59%的被调查者认为是必要的,建议的,20%-29%的被调查者认为是必要的,不建议的,或者<20%的被调查者认为是必要的,不核心。结果被调查者认为81.6%的肌肉骨骼概念为核心,18.4%为推荐,88.8%的脊柱项目为核心,11.2%的项目为推荐,69.4%的上肢和胸带项目为核心,23.7%的项目为推荐,5.5%的项目为不推荐,1.3%的项目为不核心,85.3%的项目为下肢和骨盆带项目为核心,14.4%的项目为推荐,0.3%的项目为不推荐。结论:在澳大利亚的一个脊椎指压疗法项目中,参与教学的脊椎指压师和解剖学家将大多数肌肉骨骼项目列为脊椎指压疗法教学项目中必不可少的内容,以确保为安全实践做好充分的准备,并促进与临床专业中解剖学教育标准的一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信