Anthony Crozier, Connor Osin, Ian Sadler, Lee E F Graves, Joanna Rycroft, Ellen Dawson, Gemma Miller, Daniel J Green, Louise Naylor, Christopher David Askew, Helen Jones
{"title":"Exploration of the clinical exercise physiologist standards in the UK: are they fit for purpose and how could they be developed?","authors":"Anthony Crozier, Connor Osin, Ian Sadler, Lee E F Graves, Joanna Rycroft, Ellen Dawson, Gemma Miller, Daniel J Green, Louise Naylor, Christopher David Askew, Helen Jones","doi":"10.1136/bmjsem-2025-003066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Registered clinical exercise physiologists (CEPs) are recognised healthcare professionals in the UK and are registered through the Academy of Healthcare Science (AHCS). Their practice is guided by the Clinical Exercise Physiology UK (CEP-UK) standards outlined in their scope of practice and the accompanying curriculum framework. This study aimed to explore the current CEP standards and understand if they are fit for purpose in the UK. Three phases (1) a scoping review of Medline, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. A survey was phased (2) using a 1-5 rating Likert scale ranking the importance of each component for a UK CEP. Phase (3) consisted of two focus groups to gain a consensus on the current standards and recommendations for future iterations. Overall, academics (n=26), healthcare professionals (n=25), CEPs (n=10), service managers (n=6) and researchers (n=4) were identified through purposive sampling and snowball sampling. Phase (1) identified 24 studies containing relevant knowledge and skills. During phase (2), n=58 (82%) of participants completed the survey and n=25 (35%) attended focus groups in phase (3). All knowledge and skills identified from the scoping review, the CEP-UK scope of practice, curriculum framework and the AHCS standards of proficiency and good clinical practice (n=58) were accepted. For CEP practice, an additional three health conditions were accepted from the previous iteration into the current health condition categories. A knowledge and understanding of nine key health professions was also recommended. The final consensus identified that 58 key knowledge and skills across the current health condition categories were required by CEPs, meaning that the current CEP-UK curriculum framework is fit for purpose with only minimal changes required for the next iteration.</p>","PeriodicalId":47417,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine","volume":"12 1","pages":"e003066"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12983941/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2025-003066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Registered clinical exercise physiologists (CEPs) are recognised healthcare professionals in the UK and are registered through the Academy of Healthcare Science (AHCS). Their practice is guided by the Clinical Exercise Physiology UK (CEP-UK) standards outlined in their scope of practice and the accompanying curriculum framework. This study aimed to explore the current CEP standards and understand if they are fit for purpose in the UK. Three phases (1) a scoping review of Medline, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. A survey was phased (2) using a 1-5 rating Likert scale ranking the importance of each component for a UK CEP. Phase (3) consisted of two focus groups to gain a consensus on the current standards and recommendations for future iterations. Overall, academics (n=26), healthcare professionals (n=25), CEPs (n=10), service managers (n=6) and researchers (n=4) were identified through purposive sampling and snowball sampling. Phase (1) identified 24 studies containing relevant knowledge and skills. During phase (2), n=58 (82%) of participants completed the survey and n=25 (35%) attended focus groups in phase (3). All knowledge and skills identified from the scoping review, the CEP-UK scope of practice, curriculum framework and the AHCS standards of proficiency and good clinical practice (n=58) were accepted. For CEP practice, an additional three health conditions were accepted from the previous iteration into the current health condition categories. A knowledge and understanding of nine key health professions was also recommended. The final consensus identified that 58 key knowledge and skills across the current health condition categories were required by CEPs, meaning that the current CEP-UK curriculum framework is fit for purpose with only minimal changes required for the next iteration.
注册临床运动生理学家(cep)是英国公认的医疗保健专业人员,并通过医疗保健科学学院(AHCS)注册。他们的实践由英国临床运动生理学(CEP-UK)标准指导,该标准概述了他们的实践范围和相应的课程框架。本研究旨在探讨当前的CEP标准,并了解它们是否适合英国的目的。(1)对Medline、Web of Science和护理及相关健康文献数据库的累积索引进行范围审查。一项调查是分阶段进行的(2),使用1-5级李克特量表对英国CEP的每个组成部分的重要性进行排名。阶段(3)由两个焦点小组组成,以获得对当前标准和未来迭代建议的一致意见。总体而言,通过有目的抽样和滚雪球抽样确定了学者(n=26)、医疗保健专业人员(n=25)、cep (n=10)、服务经理(n=6)和研究人员(n=4)。阶段(1)确定了24项包含相关知识和技能的研究。在阶段(2)中,n=58(82%)的参与者完成了调查,n=25(35%)的参与者参加了阶段(3)的焦点小组。从范围审查、CEP-UK实践范围、课程框架和AHCS熟练程度和良好临床实践标准(n=58)中确定的所有知识和技能均被接受。对于CEP实践,从以前的迭代中接受了另外三种健康状况到当前的健康状况类别。还建议了解和了解九种主要卫生专业。最终共识确定,cep需要当前健康状况类别中的58个关键知识和技能,这意味着当前的CEP-UK课程框架适合目的,只需对下一次迭代进行最小的更改。