Impact of evidence-based pedagogical approach on clinical reasoning among undergraduate physical therapy students

Pavithra Venugopal, Hariharasudan Subramanian, M. Manoharlal
{"title":"Impact of evidence-based pedagogical approach on clinical reasoning among undergraduate physical therapy students","authors":"Pavithra Venugopal, Hariharasudan Subramanian, M. Manoharlal","doi":"10.4103/jcrsm.jcrsm_1_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Various educational methods have been used by professional physical therapy teachers for their students. Since physical therapy includes both theory and practical, students may need to critically think about each patient’s intervention based on the stage of their illness. It is necessary to teach and assess students’ clinical reasoning abilities, so as to deal with the patients. The aim of the study was to find the impact of evidence-based pedagogical approach on clinical reasoning among undergraduate physical therapy students.\n \n \n \n The study was conducted in our institution and it was a pre- and post-test experimental study design. Forty students in their 3rd year of undergraduate physical therapy (BPT) degree program were randomly assigned to experimental group (evidence-based pedagogical approach, n = 20) and to control group (traditional pedagogical approach, n = 20). They were assessed with Self-Assessment of Clinical Reflection and Reasoning (SACRR), clinical reasoning assessment tool (CRAT) (3 domains), and multiple-choice test, at the baseline and after 4 weeks of training. Data were analyzed using an independent t-test.\n \n \n \n Experimental group showed a significant difference in SACRR (t = 3.4446, P < 0.05), CRAT (Content knowledge and Conceptual reasoning domains showed significant differences with t = 3.2110; 2.7973, P<0.05, but Procedural knowledge domain was not significant with t = 0.7791, P<0.05), and multiple-choice test (t = 5.8538, P < 0.05) scores than the control group.\n \n \n \n The use of evidence-based pedagogical approach may be more effective than the traditional pedagogical approach for improving clinical reasoning among undergraduate physical therapy students.\n","PeriodicalId":32638,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrsm.jcrsm_1_24","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

Various educational methods have been used by professional physical therapy teachers for their students. Since physical therapy includes both theory and practical, students may need to critically think about each patient’s intervention based on the stage of their illness. It is necessary to teach and assess students’ clinical reasoning abilities, so as to deal with the patients. The aim of the study was to find the impact of evidence-based pedagogical approach on clinical reasoning among undergraduate physical therapy students. The study was conducted in our institution and it was a pre- and post-test experimental study design. Forty students in their 3rd year of undergraduate physical therapy (BPT) degree program were randomly assigned to experimental group (evidence-based pedagogical approach, n = 20) and to control group (traditional pedagogical approach, n = 20). They were assessed with Self-Assessment of Clinical Reflection and Reasoning (SACRR), clinical reasoning assessment tool (CRAT) (3 domains), and multiple-choice test, at the baseline and after 4 weeks of training. Data were analyzed using an independent t-test. Experimental group showed a significant difference in SACRR (t = 3.4446, P < 0.05), CRAT (Content knowledge and Conceptual reasoning domains showed significant differences with t = 3.2110; 2.7973, P<0.05, but Procedural knowledge domain was not significant with t = 0.7791, P<0.05), and multiple-choice test (t = 5.8538, P < 0.05) scores than the control group. The use of evidence-based pedagogical approach may be more effective than the traditional pedagogical approach for improving clinical reasoning among undergraduate physical therapy students.
循证教学法对物理治疗本科生临床推理能力的影响
专业物理治疗教师对学生采用了各种教育方法。由于物理治疗包括理论和实践,学生可能需要根据病人的疾病阶段,批判性地思考对每个病人的干预。因此,有必要对学生的临床推理能力进行教学和评估,以便应对病人。本研究旨在了解循证教学法对物理治疗专业本科生临床推理能力的影响。 研究在我院进行,采用前后测试实验研究设计。40名物理治疗(BPT)本科学位课程三年级的学生被随机分配到实验组(循证教学法,20人)和对照组(传统教学法,20人)。在基线期和培训 4 周后,他们接受了临床反思与推理自我评估 (SACRR)、临床推理评估工具 (CRAT)(3 个领域)和多项选择测试的评估。数据采用独立 t 检验进行分析。 实验组的 SACRR(t = 3.4446,P < 0.05)、CRAT(内容知识和概念推理领域差异显著,t = 3.2110;2.7973,P < 0.05,但程序知识领域差异不显著,t = 0.7791,P < 0.05)和多项选择测试(t = 5.8538,P < 0.05)得分均显著高于对照组。 在提高物理治疗本科生的临床推理能力方面,循证教学法可能比传统教学法更有效。
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
13
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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