Student Perceived Confidence with Complex Patients Before and After a Simulated Case-Based Course.

Journal of Allied Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01
Natonya Q Early, Leona O Hidalgo, Christine Salmon
{"title":"Student Perceived Confidence with Complex Patients Before and After a Simulated Case-Based Course.","authors":"Natonya Q Early, Leona O Hidalgo, Christine Salmon","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared Doctor of Physical Therapy students' perceived confidence with evaluating/treating complex patients before and after a case-based patient management course. The impact of simulated learning and prior clinical exposure were explored.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A longitudinal, pretest-posttest design was used across 4 university campuses. A Physiotherapist Self-Efficacy survey was used to collect student responses before/after the course, related to adequate preparation, verbal/written communication, subjective/objective assessments, interpreting assessment findings, identifying/prioritizing patient problems, selecting appropriate short/long term goals, performing/evaluating treatments, discharge planning, progressing interventions, and dealing with a range of patient conditions. Descriptive statistics, paired sample t-tests, ANOVA tests, and conceptual content analyses were completed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty surveys were completed (13.88% response rate). Posttest confidence levels were higher compared to pretest values in all survey items. The t-statistics indicated a significant difference (p<0.001) between the pretest/posttest scores across all 80 records. Levene's statistic revealed p-values >0.001, indicating we met the assumption of homogeneity of variance across different cohort groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Student confidence levels towards complex patients significantly improved after course exposure, for all survey components in all cohorts. Simulated experiences, supplemental course materials, and prior outpatient clinical experience contributed to self-efficacy values. Six themes were identified as useful and/or needing revision to further improve self-efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":35979,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allied Health","volume":"53 1","pages":"e27-e35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allied Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Purpose: This study compared Doctor of Physical Therapy students' perceived confidence with evaluating/treating complex patients before and after a case-based patient management course. The impact of simulated learning and prior clinical exposure were explored.

Methods: A longitudinal, pretest-posttest design was used across 4 university campuses. A Physiotherapist Self-Efficacy survey was used to collect student responses before/after the course, related to adequate preparation, verbal/written communication, subjective/objective assessments, interpreting assessment findings, identifying/prioritizing patient problems, selecting appropriate short/long term goals, performing/evaluating treatments, discharge planning, progressing interventions, and dealing with a range of patient conditions. Descriptive statistics, paired sample t-tests, ANOVA tests, and conceptual content analyses were completed.

Results: Eighty surveys were completed (13.88% response rate). Posttest confidence levels were higher compared to pretest values in all survey items. The t-statistics indicated a significant difference (p<0.001) between the pretest/posttest scores across all 80 records. Levene's statistic revealed p-values >0.001, indicating we met the assumption of homogeneity of variance across different cohort groups.

Conclusions: Student confidence levels towards complex patients significantly improved after course exposure, for all survey components in all cohorts. Simulated experiences, supplemental course materials, and prior outpatient clinical experience contributed to self-efficacy values. Six themes were identified as useful and/or needing revision to further improve self-efficacy.

模拟病例课程前后学生对复杂病人的信心。
目的:本研究比较了物理治疗博士学生在基于病例的患者管理课程前后对评估/治疗复杂患者的信心。研究还探讨了模拟学习和先前临床接触的影响:在 4 个大学校园采用纵向、前测-后测设计。物理治疗师自我效能调查用于收集学生在课程前后对以下方面的反应:充分准备、口头/书面交流、主观/客观评估、解释评估结果、识别/优先处理患者问题、选择适当的短期/长期目标、执行/评估治疗、出院计划、推进干预措施以及处理各种患者状况。我们完成了描述性统计、配对样本 t 检验、方差分析检验和概念内容分析:共完成 80 份调查问卷(回复率为 13.88%)。在所有调查项目中,测试后的置信度均高于测试前的置信度。t统计显示差异显著(P0.001,表明我们满足了不同组群间方差同质性的假设:结论:课程结束后,学生对疑难杂症患者的信心水平明显提高,所有组别的所有调查项目都是如此。模拟体验、补充课程材料和先前的门诊临床经验都有助于提高自我效能值。为进一步提高自我效能感,确定了六个有用和/或需要修订的主题。
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
Journal of Allied Health
Journal of Allied Health Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of Allied Health is the official publication of the Association of Schools of Allied Health Professions (ASAHP) . The Journal is the only interdisciplinary allied health periodical, publishing scholarly works related to research and development, feature articles, research abstracts and book reviews. Readers of The Journal comprise allied health leaders, educators, faculty and students. Subscribers to The Journal consist of domestic and international college and university libraries, health organizations and hospitals. Almost 20% of subscribers, in the last three years, have been from outside of the United States. Subscribers include the World Health Organization, the American Medical Association and major universities.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信