Empathy levels in Australian chiropractic students.

OBJECTIVE: Empathy is an important modifiable quality of health care practitioners that relates to the quality of patient care. The educative process may adversely affect the empathy levels of health care students at key phases of training. This topic remains unexplored in chiropractic students to date. METHODS: A voluntary and anonymous questionnaire was distributed to all chiropractic students in an Australian university-based program in April 2021. This questionnaire recorded age, sex, year of study, and Toronto Empathy Questionnaire scores. RESULTS: Chiropractic student empathy scores approximated those of other Australian health care students. No statistical differences were found when comparing the mean scores of empathy levels across the 5 student cohorts. The empathy levels of female chiropractic students' were significantly higher than those of the male chiropractic students. CONCLUSION: This study provides a baseline from which further explorations on empathy may be conducted in chiropractic students. This holds the potential to improve practitioners' quality of life and patient outcomes and for educators to identify subject matter that may negatively affect empathy levels.

Australian chiropractic students' perceptions of education: validation of a questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to validate a questionnaire to address an absence of a measure to evaluate Australian chiropractic students' perceptions of the quality of chiropractic programs. METHOD: Potential relevant questionnaire items were selected from the Australian chiropractic accreditation standards. Chiropractic students rated these items for clarity and relevance, which resulted in a pilot questionnaire of 47 items. Principal components analysis was used to establish the structure of the scales. Finally, intra-class correlation coefficients were used to establish the scales' test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Thirty-four items were omitted resulting in the retention of 13 items that strongly loaded onto five factors. Internal consistency was adequate. The test-retest reliability ranged from adequate to good for four of the derived factors. The fifth was poor and omitted. CONCLUSION: A valid questionnaire for assessing Australian chiropractic programs has been developed comprising four scales that enquire about: 1) quality of the educational program; 2) provision of student support services; 3) enablement of independent learning; and 4) adequacy of teaching resources.

CONTEXTE: Cette étude visait à valider un questionnaire destiné à combler le manque d'outils pour connaítre l'opinion d'étudiants australiens en chiropratique de la qualité des programmes d'études. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Des points, éventuellement pertinents, ont été choisis en fonction des normes australiennes d'agrément en chiropratique. Des étudiants ont évalué leur clarté et leur pertinence; un questionnaire pilote comprenant 47 questions a été établi. Les points principaux ont servi à établir la structure des échelles. Des coefficients de corrélation interclasses ont servi à établir la fiabilité du test-retest des échelles. RÉSULTATS: Trente-quatre points ont été rejetés; on en a conservé 13 portant surtout sur cinq facteurs. La cohérence interne était suffisante. La fiabilité du test retest allait d'adéquate à bonne pour quatre des facteurs dérivés. Le degré de fiabilité du cinquième était faible et celui-ci a été omis. CONCLUSION: On a élaboré un questionnaire utile servant à évaluer des programmes d'études en chiropratique offerts en Australie. Quatre échelles ont servi à sonder les étudiants sur 1) la qualité des programmes de formation; 2) les services d'aide aux étudiants; 3) l'enseignement individualisé; et 4) la suffisance des ressources pédagogiques offerte.

Factors influencing Australian chiropractors who choose not to join national professional associations: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Professional associations (PAs) are perceived to promote their professions and support their members. Despite these advantages, about 1 in 3 Australian chiropractors choose not to belong to either of the two PAs. Our study had two objectives: 1) to explore the views of non-member chiropractors about PAs in general; 2) seek to understand the motivations of non-member Australian chiropractors about not joining a PA. METHODS: This qualitative descriptive study utilised in-depth semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions for thematic analysis and was conducted from January to April 2020. Nine participants were interviewed before no new themes were articulated. Participants had to be registered chiropractors who had not been members of a PA for at least three years. Recruitment was through a Facebook advertisement and snowball sampling. Interviews were transcribed and imported into NVivo qualitative analysis software, allowing identification of key concepts surrounding non-membership of chiropractic PAs. RESULTS: Five themes were identified. 1) A tarnished image, suggested the profession has a poor standing in the eyes of the public and other health professionals. 2) Not worth the money, expressed the annual membership dues were not viewed as good value for money. 3) Going it alone / what's in it for me? indicated there was no direct benefit or anything deemed essential for practice. 4) Two warring factions, reflected not wanting to be seen to be part of the internal conflict between conservative and evidence-based practitioners. 5) Lack of visibility, described no visible presence or strong communication that clearly displayed the advantages of membership. CONCLUSIONS: Non-members are looking for PAs to enhance the respectability of the profession in a manner that ultimately results in increased patient volume and the provision of readily accessible day-to-day resources and information. These results can inform the construction of a survey for the broader chiropractic non-membership community to confirm and expand upon these findings and potentially improve PAs.

The accreditation role of Councils on Chiropractic Education as part of the profession's journey from craft to allied health profession: a commentary.

BACKGROUND: Chiropractors see themselves as well positioned to provide safe, effective and economical care for the on-going financial burden that spinal pain imposes. However, in many places of the world, the chiropractic profession continues to find itself struggling to gain acceptance as a mainstream allied health care provider. There is evidence of the existence of undesirable chiropractic practice patterns and it is in part due to some of the world's accredited chiropractic programs. This indicated a need for scrutiny of international chiropractic educational accreditation standards, which are the responsibility of Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCEs). To this end we reviewed an emerging body of evidence about the chiropractic educational system in order to identify issues and make recommendations that may enhance professional acceptance through improved graduate outcomes and hopefully the quality of patient care. This commentary summarises the findings of that research. MAIN TEXT: We reviewed recent relevant studies, including our own, into the role and function of CCEs and found that there is sufficient evidence to identify areas of concern that could be addressed, at least in part, by improvements to CCEs' educational standards and processes. Areas included a lack of definitions for key terms such as, 'chiropractic', 'diagnosis', and 'competency', without which there can be no common understanding at a detailed level to inform graduate competencies and standards for a matching scope of practice. Further, there is some evidence to suggest that in some cases this level of detail is avoided in order to enable a "big tent" approach that allows for a diversity of approaches to clinical care to co-exist. This combined with the held view that chiropractic is "unique", highly valued, and best understood by other chiropractors, explains how students and practitioners can cling to 'traditional' thinking. This has implications for public safety and patient quality of care. CONCLUSION: If chiropractic care is to gain mainstream acceptance worldwide then it needs to adopt, through revitalised CCE accreditation standards and processes, those of other allied healthcare professions and wholeheartedly embrace science, evidence-based practice and patient centred care.

Are Councils on Chiropractic Education expectations of chiropractic graduates changing for the better: a comparison of similarities and differences of the graduate competencies of the Chiropractic Council on Education-Australasia from 2009 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: The Council on Chiropractic Education Australasia (CCE-A) is tasked with assessment and accreditation of chiropractic programs (CPs) in the Australasian community. To achieve this process the CCE-A has developed educational standards and graduate competencies which include minimum expectations of graduates prior to entry into the workforce. We sought to explore if these are changing overtime, and if so are these changes for the better. METHOD: The CCE-A 2009 and 2017 Competency Standards were located and downloaded. The competencies were placed into tables for a comparative analyses in a systematic manner to enable the identification of similarities and differences. In addition, word counts were conducted for the most commonly occurring words and this took place in December 2019. RESULTS: The 2017 competency standards were over three times smaller than the previous standards 2009 standards. More similarities than differences between the old and the new standards were found. There were 18 additions to the 2017 graduate competencies with many that were in unison with contemporary aspects of healthcare such as patient centred-care, respect for practitioner-patient boundaries and patient sexual orientation, transitioning patients to self-management, and consideration of improving lifestyle options. Some competencies were not bought forward to the new standards and included, among others, students being competent in screening for mental health conditions, an expectation to discuss cost of care, re-evaluating and monitoring patients at each visit, and knowing when to discharge patients. The competencies continued to be silent on known issues within the chiropractic profession of a lack of a definition for chiropractic that would inform scope of practice and the presence of vitalism within CPs. CONCLUSION: There have been positive changes which reflect contemporary mainstream health care standards between CCE-A graduate competency revisions. The absence of a clear definition of chiropractic and its attendant scope of practice as well as continued silence on vitalism reflect known issues within the chiropractic profession. Recommendations are made for future accreditation standards to inform the required competencies and aid the integration of chiropractic into the broader health care community.

Chiropractic students' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to joining a professional association".

Background: In Australia, about 1 in 3 chiropractors choose not to belong to either of the two professional associations and this is considerably lower compared to other health professional organisations in this country. The reasons for this remain unknown. We sought to explore possible reasons by asking chiropractic students their perceptions of barriers and facilitators to joining a professional association. However, we were unable to identify validated survey instruments that could be used to obtain information about reasons for joining health professional associations. Aim: Therefore, the objectives of this study were to: 1) develop a survey instrument that captures information about what influences chiropractic students in joining professional association; and 2) identify factors that promote association membership among chiropractic students. Methods: A literature review was undertaken to identify known determinants of professional association membership and were used to construct a preliminary survey instrument, which comprised 47 items. Six fourth-year chiropractic students assessed the preliminary survey instrument's content validity. Principal components analysis was used to establish the structure of the scales. Cronbach's alpha was derived to determine whether all items in each scale tapped a discrete construct. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between the scale scores and having joined a chiropractic professional association. Results: In March 2019, 348 chiropractic students from Murdoch University (71.0%) responded to a voluntary, anonymous questionnaire. Principal components analysis resulted in the retention of 21 items that strongly loaded onto 6 factors. Internal consistency was found to be adequate. The results of the logistic regression analysis demonstrated that only "development of the profession" was significantly associated with have joined a professional chiropractic association (p = 0.049, OR = 2.22; 95% CI = 1.26-3.40). Conclusion: Chiropractic organisations can probably most effectively increase membership numbers through raising awareness of their contribution to the development of the profession.

A failed review of CCE site inspection standards and processes.

Background: Accreditation of educational programs involves an independent agency assessing quality against a set of defined standards. Site inspection teams are appointed by an accrediting agency and compile a report with the intention of identifying deficiencies and making recommendations for their rectification and continued improvement. For chiropractic programs accreditation is carried out by Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCEs). However, the reliability of their site inspection teams remains unknown. Recent research has suggested that variability in chiropractic practice may be partially traced back to the education provider. This raises the possibility of deficient accreditation procedures that may include unsatisfactory site inspection standards or processes or the accreditation standards by which they work to.We sought to compare the various CCEs documented standards and processes for site inspection teams for similarities and differences with the intent of making recommendations to create uniform and high quality standards. Further, we sought to compare a sample of CCEs site inspection team surveys / reports for commonly identified recommendations and quality improvements and determine if they are adequately described in their accreditation standards. Method: In December of 2018 invitation emails were sent to 4 CCEs through their website portals outlining a proposed study investigating site inspection teams' standards and processes. Access was requested to all appropriately redacted documentation relating to site inspection teams and their chiropractic program reports. Follow up emails were sent several weeks later. Results: Only one of four of the CCEs responded by providing the requested information. Conclusion and recommendations: Three CCEs did not cooperate with this educational research. The possible reasons for the non-engagement is discussed.

A perspective on Councils on Chiropractic Education accreditation standards and processes from the inside: a narrative description of expert opinion: Part 2: Analyses of particular responses to research findings.

Background: This is the second article reporting on a study that sought the views of people with extensive experience in Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCEs) on research that has raised concerns about variability in accreditation standards and processes for chiropractic programs (CPs) and chiropractic practice in general. Methods: This qualitative study employed in-depth semi-structured interviews that consisted of open-ended questions asking experts about their thoughts and views on a range of issues surrounding accreditation, graduate competency standards and processes. The interviews were audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim in June and July of 2018. The transcripts were reviewed to develop codes and themes. The study followed the COREQ guidelines for qualitative studies. Results: The interviews revealed that these CCE experts were able to discern positive and negative elements of the accreditation standards and processes. They were, in general, satisfied with CCEs accreditation standards, graduating competencies, and site inspection processes. Most respondents believed that it was not possible to implement an identical set of international accreditation standards because of cultural and jurisdictional differences. This was thought more likely to be achieved if based on the notion of equivalence. Also, they expressed positive views toward an evidence-based CP curriculum and an outcomes-based assessment of student learning. However, they expressed concerns that an evidence-based approach may result in the overlooking of the clinician's experience. Diverse views were found on the presence of vitalism in CPs. These ranged from thinking vitalism should only be taught in an historical context, it was only a minority who held this view and therefore an insignificant issue. Finally, that CCEs should not regulate these personal beliefs, as this was potentially censorship. The notable absence was that the participants omitted any mention of the implications for patient safety, values and outcomes. Conclusions: Expert opinions lead us to conclude that CCEs should embrace and pursue the widely accepted mainstream healthcare standards of an evidence-based approach and place the interests of the patient above that of the profession. Recommendations are made to this end with the intent of improving CCE standards and processes of accreditation.

A perspective on Chiropractic Councils on Education accreditation standards and processes from the inside: a narrative description of expert opinion: Part 1: Themes.

Background: The aim of this study was to report on key informant opinions of Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCE) regarding recent research findings reporting on improving accreditation standards and processes for chiropractic programs (CPs). Methods: This qualitative study employed in-depth semi-structured interviews with key experienced personnel from the five CCEs in June and July of 2018. The interviews consisted of open-ended questions on a range of issues surrounding accreditation, graduate competency standards and processes. All interviews were audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were analysed to develop codes and themes using thematic analysis techniques assisted by NVivo coding software. The study followed the COREQ guidelines for qualitative studies. Results: Six themes were isolated from the interview transcripts; they were: professional differences; keep it in the family; to focus on outcomes or be prescriptive?; more resources please; inter-profession integration; and CPs making ends meet. Most respondents saw a need for CCEs standards and processes to improve interdisciplinarity while at the same time preserving the 'uniqueness' of chiropractic. Additionally, informants viewed CCEs as carrying out their functions with limited resources while simultaneously dealing with vocal disparate interest groups. Diverse views were observed on how CCEs should go about their business of assessing chiropractic programs for accreditation and re-accreditation. Conclusions: An overarching confounder for positive changes in CCE accreditation standards and processes is the inability to clearly define basic and fundamental terms such as 'chiropractic' and its resultant scope of practice. This is said to be because of vocal, diverse and disparate interest groups within the chiropractic profession. Silence or nebulous definitions negotiated in order to allow a diversity of chiropractic practice to co-exist, appears to have complicated and hindered the activities of CCEs. Recommendations are made including an adoption of an evidence-based approach to accreditation standards and processes and the use of expertise from other health professions. Further, the focus of attention should be moved away from professional interests and toward that of protection of the public and the patient.

Attempting to explore chiropractors and their clinical choices: an examination of a failed study.

Background: Recent studies have shown that psychological factors, attitudes and beliefs impact on the quality of chiropractic student clinical decisions. This association has not been studied among qualified chiropractors. Our objective was to investigate if personality, psychological factors and/or unorthodox beliefs among chiropractors are related to choices of management in specific clinical scenarios. Method: In February 2018, a subsample of chiropractors (N = 700) from a practitioner-based research network in Australia known as ACORN (N = 1680), were invited to respond to an on-line anonymous questionnaire. Questions included items relating to management of specific clinical scenarios, intolerance of uncertainty (IU) and the 'Big-5' personality score, adoption of a prescriptive technique system, self-rating of chiropractic abilities, and the level of importance of subluxation and chiropractic philosophy in the delivery of care. Descriptive analysis was to be reported and associations examined between i) personality and psychology factors, unorthodox beliefs and ii) scores obtained for management of specific clinical scenarios, numbers of interdisciplinary referrals, and guideline-based X-ray use. Results: The number of respondents was 141 (20%) and 33 of their responses were largely incomplete resulting in a final response rate of 108 (15.4%). In addition, some questions were left unanswered. These related mainly to IU and Big-5 personality measurements. Some sample characteristics (age, number of patients per week, hours worked per week) were similar to the larger ACORN project sample. However, the low response rate indicated that the final study sample was unlikely to be truly representative of the study population and the low number of participants made association testing unsuitable. Conclusion and recommendations: The low response rate and small study sample in this study made any substantive analysis inappropriate. For these reasons, the study was not concluded. However, the potential reasons for the low response from this large database of volunteer research participants are of interest and need to be investigated. Clearly, it is necessary to engage this population better to explore sensitive issues such as personality inventories and different practice profiles in the interest of effective health care delivery and patient safety.

Chiropractic, one big unhappy family: better together or apart?

Background: The chiropractic profession has a long history of internal conflict. Today, the division is between the 'evidence-friendly' faction that focuses on musculoskeletal problems based on a contemporary and evidence-based paradigm, and the 'traditional' group that subscribes to concepts such as 'subluxation' and the spine as the centre of good health. This difference is becoming increasingly obvious and problematic from both within and outside of the profession in light of the general acceptance of evidence-based practice as the basis for health care.Because this is an issue with many factors to consider, we decided to illustrate it with an analogy. We aimed to examine the chiropractic profession from the perspective of an unhappy marriage by defining key elements in happy and unhappy marriages and by identifying factors that may determine why couples stay together or spilt up. Main body: We argue here that the situation within the chiropractic profession corresponds very much to that of an unhappy couple that stays together for reasons that are unconnected with love or even mutual respect. We also contend that the profession could be conceptualised as existing on a spectrum with the 'evidence-friendly' and the 'traditional' groups inhabiting the end points, with the majority of chiropractors in the middle. This middle group does not appear to be greatly concerned with either faction and seems comfortable taking an approach of 'you never know who and what will respond to spinal manipulation'. We believe that this 'silent majority' makes it possible for groups of chiropractors to practice outside the logical framework of today's scientific concepts. Conclusion: There is a need to pause and consider if the many reasons for disharmony within the chiropractic profession are, in fact, irreconcilable. It is time to openly debate the issue of a professional split by engaging in formal and courageous discussions. This item should be prioritised on the agendas of national associations, conferences, teaching institutions, and licensing/registration as well as accreditation bodies. However, for this to happen, the middle group of chiropractors will have to become engaged and consider the benefits and risks of respectively staying together or breaking up.

Comparing the old to the new: A comparison of similarities and differences of the accreditation standards of the chiropractic council on education-international from 2010 to 2016.

Background: Chiropractic programs are accredited and monitored by regional Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCE). The CCE-International has historically been a federation of regional CCEs charged with harmonising world standards to produce quality chiropractic educational programs. The standards for accreditation periodically undergo revision. We conducted a comparison of the CCE-International 2016 Accreditation Standards with the previous version, looking for similarities and differences, expecting to see some improvements. Method: The CCE-International current (2016) and previous versions (2010) were located and downloaded. Word counts were conducted for words thought to reflect content and differences between standards. These were tabulated to identify similarities and differences. Interpretation was made independently followed by discussion between two researchers. Results: The 2016 standards were nearly 3 times larger than the previous standards. The 2016 standards were created by mapping and selection of common themes from member CCEs' accreditation standards and not through an evidence-based approach to the development and trialling of accreditation standards before implementation. In 2010 chiropractors were expected to provide attention to the relationship between the structural and neurological aspects of the body in health and disease. In 2016 they should manage mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system. Many similarities between the old and the new standards were found. Additions in 2016 included a hybrid model of accreditation founded on outcomes-based assessment of education and quality improvement. Both include comprehensive competencies for a broader role in public health. Omissions included minimal faculty qualifications and the requirement that students should be able to critically appraise scientific and clinical knowledge. Another omission was the requirement for chiropractic programs to be part of a not-for-profit educational entity. There was no mention of evidence-based practice in either standards but the word 'evidence-informed' appeared once in the 2016 standards. Conclusions: Some positive changes have taken place, such as having bravely moved towards the musculoskeletal model, but on the negative side, the requirement to produce graduates skilled at dealing with scientific texts has been removed. A more robust development approach including better transparency is needed before implementation of CCE standards and evidence-based concepts should be integrated in the programs. The CCE-International should consider the creation of a recognition of excellence in educational programs and not merely propose minimal standards.

How frequent are non-evidence-based health care beliefs in chiropractic students and do they vary across the pre-professional educational years.

Background: Evidence suggests that a students' beliefs already prior to entering a program may be important as a determinant in sustaining unsuitable health care beliefs. Our objectives were to investigate the proportion of Australian chiropractic students who hold non-evidence-based beliefs in the first year of study and the extent to which they may be involved in non-musculoskeletal health conditions. Finally, to see if this proportion varies over the course of the chiropractic program. Method: In 2016, students from two Australian chiropractic programs answered a questionnaire on how often they would give advice on five common health conditions in their future practices as well as their opinion on whether chiropractic spinal adjustments could prevent or help seven health-related conditions. Results: From a possible 831 students, 444 responded (53%). Students were highly likely to offer advice (often/quite often) on a range of non-musculoskeletal conditions. The proportions were lowest in first year and highest the final year. Also, high numbers of students held non-evidence-based beliefs about 'chiropractic spinal adjustments' which tended to occur in gradually decreasing in numbers in sequential years, except for fifth year when a reversal of the pattern occurred. Conclusions: New strategies are required for chiropractic educators if they are to produce graduates who understand and deliver evidence-based health care and able to be part of the mainstream health care system.

Chiropractic student choices in relation to indications, non-indications and contra-indications of continued care.

Background: The quality of health care provider clinical decisions has long been recognized as variable. Research has focused on clinical decision making with the aim of improving patient outcomes. No studies have looked at chiropractic students´ abilities in this regard. Method: In 2016, advanced students from two Australian chiropractic programs (N = 444) answered a questionnaire on patient case scenarios for neck and low back pain (LBP). We selected 7 scenarios representing the three categories; continuing care, non-indicated care, and contraindicated care. This represented a total of 21 tested scores. Comparisons of correct answers were made a) for program years 3, 4 and 5, and b) between the three categories of care. Results: In almost 1/3 of scenarios, correct scores were 70% or greater. Best results were for two neck pain cases (simple and with spinal cord involvement). Continued care showed most improvements with study year. However, the scenarios that reflected non-indication for continued care had much worse results and did not improve in higher years. For the obvious contraindicated neck scenario, the results were good from the beginning and progressively improved and for a contraindicated LBP scenario the results started poorly in year 3 but improved over the program years. Conclusions: Although student responses were generally good, there is still room for improvement, especially for non-indicated care. The quality of students' clinical decisions can be measured and thus has the potential to be used by chiropractic educators and regulatory bodies to identify student's in need of assistance as well as to monitor chiropractic programs in relation to student competence. Trial registration: Not applicable.

The relationship between intolerance of uncertainty in chiropractic students and their treatment intervention choices.

BACKGROUND: Psychological factors, such as intolerance of uncertainty (IU), have been shown to impact on the quality of medical care. However, this psychological measure has not been studied in the chiropractic profession. Our objective was to investigate if higher levels of IU in chiropractic students were related to poor choices of management in specific clinical scenarios. Also, we sought to investigate if levels of IU were related to students' intentions to adopt a prescriptive chiropractic technique system and evaluate their levels of self-belief. METHOD: Between October and November of 2016, students from two Australian chiropractic programs (N = 444) answered a questionnaire on measures of IU levels, patient case scenarios for neck and low back pain, and questions about self-ratings of their future chiropractic abilities and perceived need for the adoption of a chiropractic technique system. Associations were tested by the IU score and the therapeutic choices relating to a) a neck pain case scenario, b) a low back pain scenario, c) various technique systems, and d) the self-rated competence level treating the IU score both as a continuous and a categorical variable. RESULTS: There was an overall response rate of 53%. Those students who were high in levels of IU were significantly more likely to make incorrect clinical decisions than those with normal or low levels of IU for the neck pain case scenario. No differences were found on the low back pain scenario, on preferences to use a technique system in the future, or on predicted self-rating of competence after graduation. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological factors, such as IU, may have an impact on chiropractic students' clinical decisions. However, it does not impact on all aspects of practice. This finding has implications for chiropractic educators, especially when dealing with neck pain. However, it may be relevant to continue the search for specific personality profiles in relation to various favourable and unfavourable practice patterns, as it is unknown whether these dynamics are important for other aspects of chiropractic education.

The relationship between levels of resilience and coping styles in chiropractic students and perceived levels of stress and well-being.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between chiropractic students' coping styles and levels of resilience with their physical injuries, perceived levels of stress, and well-being. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to the entire student body of the chiropractic program at Murdoch University, and gathered demographic variables and responses to the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Perceived Levels of Stress Scale, Everyday Feelings Questionnaire, and Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations. Linear regression analysis was used to calculate for significant relationships. RESULTS: Of 244 students, 194 (81%) completed the surveys. Being female and not having recovered from an injury within 12 months was significantly associated with lower levels of well-being and higher levels of stress. Being female, possessing an increased use of an emotional-based coping style, and having lower levels of well-being were associated with higher levels of stress (R2 = 0.65, F(6,164) = 50.47, p < .001). Lower levels of well-being were associated with being female, higher perceived levels of stress, lower levels of resilience, and an increased use emotional coping styles (R2 = 0.64, F[6,164] = 49.5, p < .001). CONCLUSION: It is possible to identify chiropractic students at the university who are at risk of experiencing low levels of well-being and high levels of stress. These students may benefit from interventions aimed at enhancing their coping style choices and increasing their resilience levels. Future studies are recommended to see if these findings are consistent across chiropractic programs nationally and internationally.

Similarities and differences of a selection of key accreditation standards between chiropractic councils on education: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Councils of Chiropractic Education (CCE) indirectly influence patient care and safety through their role of ensuring the standards of training delivered by chiropractic educational institutions. This is achieved by a process of accreditation where CCEs define and assess graduate competencies and educational standards. A previous study comparing CCE graduate competencies found variations between the CCE jurisdictions. It was proffered that variations in standards may potentially compromise patient care and safety and also inter-jurisdictional mutual recognition. This study continues the examination of CCEs by looking for similarities and differences in CCE accreditation standards. There were two purposes of this review. The first was to compare the accreditation standards, domains of accreditation standards, and components of the domains of accreditation standards as represented by the domains of "Mission, goals, vision, objectives", "Resources", "Faculty/Academic staff", "Educational program/curriculum". In addition, we compared the accreditation standards between CCEs and those of the widely accepted medical accreditation standards of the World Federation of Medical Education (WFME), in order to search for deficiencies and opportunities for improvements in these standards. The second purpose was to make recommendations, if significant deficiencies or variations were found. METHOD: We undertook a systematic review of the similarities and differences between five CCEs' definitions of an accreditation standard and the descriptive lists of accreditation standards they have adopted. CCE selection criteria and data selection method were undertaken in a systematic manner. This information was tabulated for a comparative analysis and took place in April 2016. RESULTS: Only two CCEs had a definition of the term "accreditation / educational standard". At the domain level there was considerably more similarities than differences. The differences became more apparent when the comparisons were made at the component level. These included intended purposes of the mission statement, standards for faculty staff, requirements for clinical training by students, program budgetary autonomy and transparency, the inclusion of chiropractic philosophy and history, and which subjects should be taught in basic, behavioural and clinical sciences. CONCLUSIONS: A series of recommendations were made. These included the need for an increased clarity of the required basic and clinical science subjects, teaching clinic student requirements, and faculty staff qualifications. These are proposed with the intention of creating uniform and high quality international accreditation standards for chiropractic education. Future research should compare the levels of CCEs inspection standards and processes to see if similarities and differences exist also there. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

How comprehensively is evidence-based practice represented in councils on chiropractic education (CCE) educational standards: a systematic audit.

BACKGROUND: The incorporation of evidence-based practice (EBP) is widely recognised as a necessary process for entry-level health professional training. Accreditation documents reflect the practice standards of health professions. No previous study has assessed the extent to which EBP has been taken up by chiropractic regulatory/licencing authorities, known as Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCEs), around the world. The purposes of this study were to examine CCEs' educational standards for signs of a positive and negative approach to EBP as indicated by the prevalence and use of the words evidence, research, subluxation and vitalism, and to make recommendations if significant deficiencies were found. METHOD: We undertook a systematic audit of the educational standard documents of the various CCEs. CCEs were selected on the basis of the World Health Organisation. Two investigators identified the occurrences of terms explicitly related to EBP: evidence, evidence-based, research, subluxation and vitalism. This information was tabulated for comparative purposes. The date of the study was March 2016. RESULTS: Occurrences of the term evidence, as it related to EBP, was highest in the CCE-Europe (n = 6), followed by CCE-Australia (n = 2), and CCE-USA (n = 1). None were found in the CCE-International or CCE-Canada documents. The term research appeared most frequently in the CCE-Europe documents (n = 43), followed by CCE-USA (n-32), CCE-Australia (n = 29), CCE-Canada (n = 9) and CCE-International (n = 8). The term subluxation was found only once (CCE-USA) and vitalism did not appear in any educational standard documents. CONCLUSIONS: Accreditation bodies are powerfully positioned to act as a driver for education providers to give greater priority to embedding EBP into entry-level programs and shaping future directions within the profession. Terminology relating explicitly to EBP appears to be lacking in the educational standard documentation of CCEs. Therefore, future revisions of accreditation standards should address lack of terminology.

Similarities and differences of graduate entry-level competencies of chiropractic councils on education: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Councils of Chiropractic Education (CCE) indirectly influence patient care and safety through their role of ensuring the standards of training delivered by chiropractic educational institutions. This is achieved by CCEs defining competence and creating lists of descriptive statements to establish the necessary standards for students to attain before graduating. A preliminary review suggested that these definitions and descriptive lists lacked consensus. This creates the potential for variations in standards between the CCE jurisdictions and may compromise patient care and safety and also inter-jurisdictional mutual recognition. The purposes of this study were 1) to investigate similarities and differences between the CCEs in their definitions of competence, domains of educational competencies, components of the domains of competencies, as represented by assessment and diagnosis, ethics, intellectual development, and 2) to make recommendations, if significant deficiencies were found. METHOD: We undertook a systematic review of the similarities and differences between various CCEs definitions of competence and the descriptive lists of educational competencies they have adopted. CCEs were selected on the basis of WHO recommendations. Blinded investigators selected the data from CCE websites and direct contact with CCEs. This information was tabulated for a comparative analysis. RESULTS: All CCEs' definitions of competence included the elements of "knowledge", "skills" and "attitudes" whereas only one CCE included the expected "abilities" element. The educational application of the definition of competency among CCEs varied. A high level of similarity when comparing the domains of competence adopted by CCEs was found despite variations in the structure. Differences between CCEs became increasingly apparent when the three selected representative domains were compared. CCEs were found to stipulate varying levels of prescriptiveness for graduate entry level standards. CONCLUSIONS: A series of recommendations are proposed to create uniform and high quality international standards of care. Future research should compare the levels of CCEs enforcement of standards to see if similarities and differences exist.

VARK learning preferences and mobile anatomy software application use in pre-clinical chiropractic students.

Ubiquitous smartphone ownership and reduced face-to-face teaching time may lead to students making greater use of mobile technologies in their learning. This is the first study to report on the prevalence of mobile gross anatomy software applications (apps) usage in pre-clinical chiropractic students and to ascertain if a relationship exists between preferred learning styles as determined by the validated VARK(©) questionnaire and use of mobile anatomy apps. The majority of the students who completed the VARK questionnaire were multimodal learners with kinesthetic and visual preferences. Sixty-seven percent (73/109) of students owned one or more mobile anatomy apps which were used by 57 students. Most of these students owned one to five apps and spent less than 30 minutes per week using them. Six of the top eight mobile anatomy apps owned and recommended by the students were developed by 3D4Medical. Visual learning preferences were not associated with time spent using mobile anatomy apps (OR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.12-1.40). Similarly, kinesthetic learning preferences (OR = 1.88, 95% CI 0.18-20.2), quadmodal preferences (OR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.06-9.25), or gender (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 0.48-4.81) did not affect the time students' spent using mobile anatomy apps. Learning preferences do not appear to influence students' time spent using mobile anatomy apps. Anat Sci Educ 9: 247-254. © 2015 American Association of Anatomists.