Competency gaps in respiratory therapy: evidence from a global survey.

Korean journal of medical education Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-27 DOI:10.3946/kjme.2025.355
Tisha Ann Skariah, Udaya Kumar Rao, Manjush Karthika
{"title":"Competency gaps in respiratory therapy: evidence from a global survey.","authors":"Tisha Ann Skariah, Udaya Kumar Rao, Manjush Karthika","doi":"10.3946/kjme.2025.355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Respiratory therapy (RT) has become a vital component of modern healthcare, particularly in managing acute and chronic pulmonary conditions. The rising global burden of respiratory diseases has amplified the demand for skilled RT professionals capable of performing high-risk, low-frequency procedures with precision. Despite the shift toward competency-based education in healthcare, RT training remains fragmented. Disparities in training quality, assessment methodologies, and simulation access result in inconsistent clinical competencies among RT graduates. The absence of a standardized, globally recognized competency framework further compounds these challenges, affecting workforce readiness and patient safety. To date, no global study has systematically quantified competency disparities across RT programs using a standardized framework, leaving a critical gap in comparative evidence needed to guide educational policy and global accreditation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was conducted targeting RT professionals, educators, and institutional leaders across multiple countries. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and gap percentage analysis to identify variations in training practices, competency expectations, and observed deficiencies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings revealed significant competency gaps, especially in advanced interventions like extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and lung ultrasound. Inconsistencies in assessment tools, simulation integration, and remediation protocols were noted across institutions. The majority of respondents emphasized the need for competency standardization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study confirms a pressing global need for a structured, evidence-based competency framework in RT education. Standardization will improve clinical consistency, facilitate workforce mobility, and enhance patient care outcomes worldwide.</p>","PeriodicalId":37737,"journal":{"name":"Korean journal of medical education","volume":"37 4","pages":"437-451"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12683264/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean journal of medical education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2025.355","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Respiratory therapy (RT) has become a vital component of modern healthcare, particularly in managing acute and chronic pulmonary conditions. The rising global burden of respiratory diseases has amplified the demand for skilled RT professionals capable of performing high-risk, low-frequency procedures with precision. Despite the shift toward competency-based education in healthcare, RT training remains fragmented. Disparities in training quality, assessment methodologies, and simulation access result in inconsistent clinical competencies among RT graduates. The absence of a standardized, globally recognized competency framework further compounds these challenges, affecting workforce readiness and patient safety. To date, no global study has systematically quantified competency disparities across RT programs using a standardized framework, leaving a critical gap in comparative evidence needed to guide educational policy and global accreditation.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted targeting RT professionals, educators, and institutional leaders across multiple countries. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and gap percentage analysis to identify variations in training practices, competency expectations, and observed deficiencies.

Results: Findings revealed significant competency gaps, especially in advanced interventions like extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and lung ultrasound. Inconsistencies in assessment tools, simulation integration, and remediation protocols were noted across institutions. The majority of respondents emphasized the need for competency standardization.

Conclusion: The study confirms a pressing global need for a structured, evidence-based competency framework in RT education. Standardization will improve clinical consistency, facilitate workforce mobility, and enhance patient care outcomes worldwide.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

呼吸治疗的能力差距:来自全球调查的证据。
目的:呼吸治疗(RT)已成为现代医疗保健的重要组成部分,特别是在管理急性和慢性肺部疾病方面。全球呼吸系统疾病负担的不断增加扩大了对熟练的放射治疗专业人员的需求,这些专业人员能够精确地执行高风险、低频率的手术。尽管医疗保健向基于能力的教育转变,但RT培训仍然分散。培训质量、评估方法和模拟访问的差异导致RT毕业生临床能力不一致。缺乏标准化的、全球公认的能力框架进一步加剧了这些挑战,影响了劳动力准备和患者安全。迄今为止,还没有一项全球性研究使用标准化框架系统地量化了RT项目之间的能力差异,这在指导教育政策和全球认证所需的比较证据方面留下了严重的空白。方法:针对多个国家的RT专业人员、教育工作者和机构领导人进行了横断面调查。定量数据分析使用描述性统计、卡方检验和差距百分比分析,以确定培训实践、能力期望和观察到的缺陷的变化。结果:调查结果显示了显著的能力差距,特别是在先进的干预措施,如体外膜氧合和肺超声。评估工具、模拟集成和补救协议的不一致性在各机构之间被注意到。大多数受访者强调了能力标准化的必要性。结论:该研究证实了在RT教育中迫切需要一个结构化的、基于证据的能力框架。标准化将提高临床一致性,促进劳动力流动,并在全球范围内提高患者护理效果。
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
Korean journal of medical education
Korean journal of medical education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: The journal seeks to provide theoretical foundations, practical analysis, and up-to-date developments in health professional education: Curriculum development Teaching and learning Student assessment Educational evaluation Educational management and policy The journal welcomes high-quality papers on all levels of health professional education, including: Undergraduate education Postgraduate training Continuous professional development Interprofessional education.
×
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
小红书