Perspectives of work readiness among Australian health students trained during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: To explore perspectives of work readiness, including readiness to work rurally, among health students trained in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Participants were allied health, medicine, and nursing students in the later years of their degree (third, fourth or final year of an undergraduate entry to practice degree, or second year of postgraduate entry to practice degree), where training is clinically immersive. These students had completed a University Department of Rural Health facilitated rural and remote placement between January 2021 and October 2022. They participated in a cross-sectional online survey (n = 426), comprising Likert-scale questions. Interested survey respondents participated in a semi-structured interview (n = 34). Multiple logistic regression was conducted to examine the predictors of work readiness within the survey, and interview data was analysed via reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Among survey respondents, 69.7% felt they would be ready to be a health practitioner when the time came to graduate and 71.8% felt clinically prepared to work in a rural location. Concerns about having developed enough clinical skills on placements to competently practice on graduation and being able to continue studying their course during the pandemic were both predictive of work readiness and feeling clinically prepared to work rurally. Four themes reflecting factors impacting work readiness were developed from interview data: (1) 'I'd estimate probably a 20-30% reduction in face-to-face handling practice over the course of all of my placements' encompassed student concerns regarding the collective impact of cancelled placements and lower patient attendance at healthcare facilities on clinical skill development; (2) 'Two and a half years of sitting behind a computer' related to student experiences of superficial learning and cohort disconnectedness due to online course delivery and loss of on campus simulations; (3) 'I'll still need like a lot of support in my grad year' related to students recognising the need for support and supervision post-qualifying to bridge the gaps in their learning; and (4) 'We are the COVID nurses' encompassed student recognition of skills gained including communication skills, competence with technology and telehealth, knowledge of infection control, and work readiness skills (e.g. adaptability and resilience) as a result of training during the global pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Universities can support work readiness during pandemic circumstances by fostering clinical skills development through continuation of quality placement experiences and face-to-face curriculum delivery. Although health graduates trained during the pandemic are likely to have a range of additional work ready skills, health services will need to proactively support their transition into the workforce in the coming years.

University staff perspectives on determinants of high-quality health professions student placements in regional, rural and remote Australia: protocol for a mixed-method study.

INTRODUCTION: In rural areas, work-integrated learning in the form of health student placements has several potential benefits, including contributing to student learning, enhancing rural health service capacity and attracting future rural health workforce. Understanding what constitutes a high-quality rural placement experience is important for enhancing these outcomes. There is no current standardised definition of quality in the context of rural health placements, nor is there understanding of how this can be achieved across different rural contexts. This study is guided by one broad research question: what do university staff believe are the determinants of high-quality health professions student placements in regional, rural and remote Australia? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will adopt a convergent mixed-method design with two components. Component A will use explanatory sequential mixed methods. The first phase of component A will use a survey to explore determinants that contribute to the development of high-quality health student placements from the perspective of university staff who are not employed in University Departments of Rural Health and are involved in the delivery of health student education. The second phase will use semistructured interviews with the same stakeholder group (non-University Department of Rural Health university staff) to identify the determinants of high-quality health student placements. Component B will use a case study Employing COnceptUal schema for policy and Translation Engagement in Research mind mapping method to capture determinants that contribute to the development of high-quality health student placements from the perspective of University Department of Rural Health university staff. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Melbourne Human Ethics Committee approved the study (2022-23201-33373-5). Following this, seven other Australian university human research ethics committees provided external approval to conduct the study. The results of the study will be presented in several peer-review publications and summary reports to key stakeholder groups.

A qualitative exploration of health student perspectives of rural and remote placements during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To explore health student perspectives of rural and remote placements during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Allied health, nursing and medical students with a planned rural or remote placement between February and October 2020. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews (n = 29) with data thematically analysed. RESULTS: Five main themes emerged from student experiences: (1) 'Do we go? Don't we go? Like how much risk is involved?' related to student concerns regarding acquiring and transmitting COVID-19 on placement; (2) 'We are sort of just standing at the door trying to watch' encompassed student perceptions of missed clinical learning opportunities in response to health and safety measures related to COVID-19; (3) 'I, as a student, sort of fell under the radar' related to student perceptions of suboptimal supervision; (4) 'It was a bit more difficult to engage with that wider community' recognised student feelings of social disconnection and their lack of opportunity for community immersion; and (5) 'We felt like we got something that is more than we expected' emerged from student reflections on training during the pandemic and alternative placements (virtual, simulated and non-clinical) that exceeded expectations for learning. CONCLUSIONS: Although most students were willing and able to undertake their rural or remote placement in some form during the early stages of the pandemic and identified unanticipated learning benefits, students recognised lost opportunities to build clinical skills, become culturally aware and connect with rural communities. It remains unknown how these rural and remote placement experiences will impact rural intention and in turn, rural workforce development.

Identifying features of quality in rural placements for health students: scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To explore and synthesise the evidence relating to features of quality in rural health student placements. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, ProQuest, Informit, Scopus, ERIC and several grey literature data sources (1 January 2005 to 13 October 2020). STUDY SELECTION: The review included peer-reviewed and grey literature from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development listed countries that focused on quality of health student placements in regional, rural and remote areas. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted regarding the methodological and design characteristics of each data source, and the features suggested to contribute to student placement quality under five categories based on a work-integrated learning framework. RESULTS: Of 2866 resulting papers, 101 were included for data charting and content analysis. The literature was dominated by medicine and nursing student placement research. No literature explicitly defined quality in rural health student placements, although proxy indicators for quality such as satisfaction, positive experiences, overall effectiveness and perceived value were identified. Content analysis resulted in four overarching domains pertaining to features of rural health student placement quality: (1) learning and teaching in a rural context, (2) rural student placement characteristics, (3) key relationships and (4) required infrastructure. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that quality in rural health student placements hinges on contextually specific features. Further research is required to explore these findings and ways in which these features can be measured during rural health student placements.

'I can't go, I can't afford it': Financial concern amongst health students undertaking rural and remote placements during COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: As the coronavirus pandemic unfolded during 2020, widespread financial uncertainty emerged amongst university students across the globe. What is not yet clear is how Australian health students were financially impacted during the initial stages of the pandemic and whether this influenced their ability to undertake planned rural or remote placements. OBJECTIVE: To examine (a) financial concern amongst health students during COVID-19, (b) the financial implications of changes to planned rural or remote placements and (c) the impact of these factors on students' ability to undertake placements during the pandemic. DESIGN: Mixed-methods design involving an online survey (n = 1210) and semi-structured interviews (n = 29). Nursing, medical and allied health students with a planned University Department of Rural Health-facilitated rural or remote placement between February and October 2020 were invited to participate. FINDINGS: 54.6% of surveyed students reported financial concern during COVID-19. Financial concern correlated with both changes in financial position and employment, with 36.6% of students reporting a reduction in income and 43.1% of students reporting a reduction in, or cessation of regular employment. Placement changes yielded a range of financial implications. Cancelled placements saved some students travel and accommodation costs, but left others out of pocket if these expenses were prepaid. Placements that went ahead often incurred increased accommodation costs due to limited availability. Financial concern and/or financial implications of placement changes ultimately prevented some students from undertaking their rural or remote placement as planned. DISCUSSION: Many nursing, allied health and medical students expressed financial concern during COVID-19, associated with a loss of regular employment and income. Placement changes also presented unforeseen financial burden for students. These factors ultimately prevented some students from undertaking their planned rural or remote placement. CONCLUSION: Universities need to consider how best to align financially burdensome placements with the personal circumstances of students during periods of economic uncertainty.

Impact of COVID-19 on rural and remote student placements in Australia: A national study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate students' perceptions of the impact of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 on rural and remote placements facilitated by 16 University Departments of Rural Health in Australia in 2020. DESIGN: A mixed-method design comprising an online survey and semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Allied health, nursing and medical students with a planned University Departments of Rural Health-facilitated rural or remote placement between February and October 2020. INTERVENTION: A planned rural or remote placement in 2020 facilitated by a University Departments of Rural Health, regardless of placement outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Questionnaire included placement outcome (completed or not), discipline of study (nursing, allied health, medicine), and Likert measures of impact to placement (including supervision, placement tasks, location, accommodation, client contact and student learning) and placement experience (overall, support, supervision, university support). Semi-structured interviews asked about placement planning, outcome, decisions, experience and student perceptions. RESULTS: While coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 reportedly impacted on the majority of planned placements, most students (80%) were able to complete their University Departments of Rural Health-facilitated placement in some form and were satisfied with their placement experience. Common placement changes included changes to tasks, setting, supervisors and location. Allied health students were significantly more likely to indicate that their placement had been impacted and also felt more supported by supervisors and universities than nursing students. Interview participants expressed concerns regarding the potential impact of cancelled and adapted placements on graduation and future employment. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was reported to impact the majority of University Departments of Rural Health-facilitated rural and remote placements in 2020. Fortunately, most students were able to continue to undertake a rural or remote placement in some form and were largely satisfied with their placement experience. Students were concerned about their lack of clinical learning and graduating on time with adequate clinical competence.

Impact of placement type on the development of clinical competency in speech-language pathology students.

BACKGROUND: Speech-language pathology students gain experience and clinical competency through clinical education placements. However, currently little empirical information exists regarding how competency develops. Existing research about the effectiveness of placement types and models in developing competency is generally descriptive and based on opinions and perceptions. The changing nature of education of speech-language pathology students, diverse student cohorts, and the crisis in finding sufficient clinical education placements mean that establishing the most effective and efficient methods for developing clinical competency in students is needed. AIMS: To gather empirical information regarding the development of competence in speech-language pathology students; and to determine if growth of competency differs in groups of students completing placements that differ in terms of caseload, intensity and setting. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Participants were students in the third year of a four-year undergraduate speech-language pathology degree who completed three clinical placements across the year and were assessed with the COMPASS® competency assessment tool. Competency development for the whole group across the three placements is described. Growth of competency in groups of students completing different placement types is compared. Interval-level data generated from the students' COMPASS® results were subjected to parametric statistical analyses. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: The whole group of students increased significantly in competency from placement to placement across different placement settings, intensities and client age groups. Groups completing child placements achieved significantly higher growth in competency when compared with the competency growth of students completing adult placements. Growth of competency was not significantly different for students experiencing different intensity of placements, or different placement settings. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: These results confirm that the competency of speech-language pathology students develops across three clinical placements over a one-year period regardless of placement type or context, indicating that there may be a transfer of learning between placements types. Further research investigating patterns of competency development in speech-language pathology students is warranted to ensure that assumptions used to design clinical learning opportunities are based on valid evidence.

An international study of clinical education practices in speech-language pathology.

This study identified the clinical placement and supervisory models used within 45 speech-language pathology professional preparation programs in seven English-speaking countries and the drivers influencing the adoption of these models. University personnel completed an on-line survey about the placement and supervisory models used in their programs, their opinions regarding the effectiveness of the models in developing student competency, and the factors influencing the adoption of different models. Responses from the survey were analysed through descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. "Traditional" placement models such as block and weekly placements, as well as traditional supervisory models utilizing a speech-language pathologist as supervisor in a 1:1 student-to-supervisor ratio were the most widely used in the clinical education of speech-language pathologists. "Non-traditional" models, where the overall structure of the practicum experience or the delivery of supervision within the practicum experience has been altered from the traditional models, were used with differing frequency across countries. The major influences on the adoption of non-traditional models included attitudes about the effectiveness of the models, availability of placements, standards of professional associations, and student learning outcomes, particularly in relation to exposure to clinical sub-groups. Further evidence regarding the effectiveness of both traditional and non-traditional placement and supervisory models needs to be developed. To develop this evidence, consistent terminology and a shared understanding of terminology needs to be established.