对物理治疗专业行为测量的共识。

Robyn Davies, C. Ellerton, C. Evans
{"title":"对物理治疗专业行为测量的共识。","authors":"Robyn Davies, C. Ellerton, C. Evans","doi":"10.3138/ptc.2015-45E","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: We determined which professional behaviours (PBs) are important and feasible to measure in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) intended to assess the hands-on skills and knowledge of students in a Canadian physical therapy (PT) program. Methods: We used a modified Delphi technique to identify the criteria required to assess PBs in PT students during an OSCE. We conducted a focus group to better understand the results of the modified Delphi process. Results: Experienced local OSCE examiners participated in the modified Delphi panel, which consisted of two rounds of surveys: round 1 (n=12) and round 2 (n=10). A total of 31 PBs were reduced to 18 through the two rounds. Five of the panellists participated in the focus group, reduced the 18 PBs to 15, and then identified 4 as clinical skills. Participants categorized the remaining 11 as mixed PBs and clinical skills (1 item), PBs (4 items), or communication skills (6 items). Conclusion: This study provides preliminary evidence to support the feasibility and importance of evaluating 5 PB items in practical skills OSCEs for entry-to-practice PT students.","PeriodicalId":390485,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reaching Consensus on Measuring Professional Behaviour in Physical Therapy Objective Structured Clinical Examinations.\",\"authors\":\"Robyn Davies, C. Ellerton, C. Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/ptc.2015-45E\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: We determined which professional behaviours (PBs) are important and feasible to measure in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) intended to assess the hands-on skills and knowledge of students in a Canadian physical therapy (PT) program. Methods: We used a modified Delphi technique to identify the criteria required to assess PBs in PT students during an OSCE. We conducted a focus group to better understand the results of the modified Delphi process. Results: Experienced local OSCE examiners participated in the modified Delphi panel, which consisted of two rounds of surveys: round 1 (n=12) and round 2 (n=10). A total of 31 PBs were reduced to 18 through the two rounds. Five of the panellists participated in the focus group, reduced the 18 PBs to 15, and then identified 4 as clinical skills. Participants categorized the remaining 11 as mixed PBs and clinical skills (1 item), PBs (4 items), or communication skills (6 items). Conclusion: This study provides preliminary evidence to support the feasibility and importance of evaluating 5 PB items in practical skills OSCEs for entry-to-practice PT students.\",\"PeriodicalId\":390485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc.2015-45E\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc.2015-45E","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

目的:我们确定哪些专业行为(PBs)在客观结构化临床检查(OSCE)中是重要和可行的,旨在评估加拿大物理治疗(PT)项目中学生的实践技能和知识。方法:我们使用改进的德尔菲技术来确定在OSCE期间评估PT学生PBs所需的标准。我们进行了一个焦点小组,以更好地了解改进的德尔菲过程的结果。结果:经验丰富的当地欧安组织审查员参与了改进的德尔菲小组,该小组由两轮调查组成:第一轮(n=12)和第二轮(n=10)。经过两轮的推演,共有31个PBs减至18个。五名小组成员参加了焦点小组,将18项PBs减少到15项,然后确定了4项临床技能。参与者将其余11项分为混合PBs和临床技能(1项)、PBs(4项)或沟通技能(6项)。结论:本研究提供了初步的证据,支持在实习PT学生的实践技能oses中评估5个PB项目的可行性和重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reaching Consensus on Measuring Professional Behaviour in Physical Therapy Objective Structured Clinical Examinations.
Purpose: We determined which professional behaviours (PBs) are important and feasible to measure in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) intended to assess the hands-on skills and knowledge of students in a Canadian physical therapy (PT) program. Methods: We used a modified Delphi technique to identify the criteria required to assess PBs in PT students during an OSCE. We conducted a focus group to better understand the results of the modified Delphi process. Results: Experienced local OSCE examiners participated in the modified Delphi panel, which consisted of two rounds of surveys: round 1 (n=12) and round 2 (n=10). A total of 31 PBs were reduced to 18 through the two rounds. Five of the panellists participated in the focus group, reduced the 18 PBs to 15, and then identified 4 as clinical skills. Participants categorized the remaining 11 as mixed PBs and clinical skills (1 item), PBs (4 items), or communication skills (6 items). Conclusion: This study provides preliminary evidence to support the feasibility and importance of evaluating 5 PB items in practical skills OSCEs for entry-to-practice PT students.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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