Learning technologies and health technologies in complementary medicine clinical work and education: Examination of the perspectives of academics and students in Australia and the United States

IF 1.7 Q2 Medicine
Alastair C. Gray, Amie Steel, Jon Adams
{"title":"Learning technologies and health technologies in complementary medicine clinical work and education: Examination of the perspectives of academics and students in Australia and the United States","authors":"Alastair C. Gray,&nbsp;Amie Steel,&nbsp;Jon Adams","doi":"10.1016/j.aimed.2021.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The use of technologies continues to grow in healthcare provision, and learning technologies now dominate tertiary education. Meanwhile, complementary medicine (CM) constitutes a substantial component of contemporary healthcare, yet the education of existing and future CM practitioners has received little empirical attention. In direct response, our study examines the perceptions of CM students and faculty related specifically to health and learning technologies in clinical CM work and education.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional online survey was administered to all current students (n = 4851) and tenured, contracted and adjunct academics (n =530) at two CM education institutions – in the US and in Australia.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Most student respondents (n = 134, 49%) reported that they either felt they were unsure if they would use telehealth in clinical practice or that they would use it (n = 116, 43%). The majority of all academic respondents did not believe it possible to conduct basic clinical processes online such as reading a patient's body language (M3.8, SD 1.0), conducting quality clinical training in CM settings (M3.2, SD 1.3) or learning rapport skills (M3.2, SD 1.2). Of those academics who were also in clinical practice, only a small number reported conducting virtual consultations in their CM work (n = 7,15.9%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our findings highlight a potential disparity of perceptions between academics and students in these CM educational settings especially in relation to telehealth. Academics expressed hesitancy to fully rely on technologies to develop practitioners in a field where ‘formation of professional character’ is considered so important.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7343,"journal":{"name":"Advances in integrative medicine","volume":"9 1","pages":"Pages 22-29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in integrative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212958821000896","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background

The use of technologies continues to grow in healthcare provision, and learning technologies now dominate tertiary education. Meanwhile, complementary medicine (CM) constitutes a substantial component of contemporary healthcare, yet the education of existing and future CM practitioners has received little empirical attention. In direct response, our study examines the perceptions of CM students and faculty related specifically to health and learning technologies in clinical CM work and education.

Methods

A cross-sectional online survey was administered to all current students (n = 4851) and tenured, contracted and adjunct academics (n =530) at two CM education institutions – in the US and in Australia.

Results

Most student respondents (n = 134, 49%) reported that they either felt they were unsure if they would use telehealth in clinical practice or that they would use it (n = 116, 43%). The majority of all academic respondents did not believe it possible to conduct basic clinical processes online such as reading a patient's body language (M3.8, SD 1.0), conducting quality clinical training in CM settings (M3.2, SD 1.3) or learning rapport skills (M3.2, SD 1.2). Of those academics who were also in clinical practice, only a small number reported conducting virtual consultations in their CM work (n = 7,15.9%).

Conclusion

Our findings highlight a potential disparity of perceptions between academics and students in these CM educational settings especially in relation to telehealth. Academics expressed hesitancy to fully rely on technologies to develop practitioners in a field where ‘formation of professional character’ is considered so important.

辅助医学临床工作和教育中的学习技术和卫生技术:对澳大利亚和美国学者和学生观点的考察
技术在医疗保健领域的应用持续增长,学习技术现在主导了高等教育。与此同时,补充医学(CM)构成了当代医疗保健的重要组成部分,但现有和未来的CM从业者的教育却很少得到实证关注。作为直接回应,我们的研究考察了中医学生和教师对临床中医工作和教育中健康和学习技术的看法。方法对美国和澳大利亚两所CM教育机构的所有在校生(n = 4851)以及终身教授、合同制教授和兼职教授(n =530)进行横断面在线调查。结果大多数学生受访者(n = 134, 49%)报告说,他们要么觉得他们不确定是否会在临床实践中使用远程医疗,要么他们会使用它(n = 116, 43%)。大多数学术受访者不相信在线进行基本临床过程是可能的,例如阅读患者的肢体语言(M3.8, SD 1.0),在CM设置中进行高质量的临床培训(M3.2, SD 1.3)或学习融洽关系技能(M3.2, SD 1.2)。在那些也在临床实践的学者中,只有少数人报告在他们的CM工作中进行虚拟咨询(n = 7,15.9%)。结论:我们的研究结果突出了在这些CM教育环境中,特别是在远程医疗方面,学者和学生之间存在潜在的观念差异。在一个被认为非常重要的领域,学者们对完全依靠技术来培养从业者表示犹豫。
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
Advances in integrative medicine
Advances in integrative medicine INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Integrative Medicine (AIMED) is an international peer-reviewed, evidence-based research and review journal that is multi-disciplinary within the fields of Integrative and Complementary Medicine. The journal focuses on rigorous quantitative and qualitative research including systematic reviews, clinical trials and surveys, whilst also welcoming medical hypotheses and clinically-relevant articles and case studies disclosing practical learning tools for the consulting practitioner. By promoting research and practice excellence in the field, and cross collaboration between relevant practitioner groups and associations, the journal aims to advance the practice of IM, identify areas for future research, and improve patient health outcomes. International networking is encouraged through clinical innovation, the establishment of best practice and by providing opportunities for cooperation between organisations and communities.
×
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