Clinical Education Data Management: Current Landscape in Entry-Level Physical Therapist Education.

BACKGROUND: Data management (DM) systems represent an opportunity for innovation in education and data-driven decision-making (DDDM) in allied health education. Understanding clinical education (CE) DM systems in entry-level physical therapy (PT) education programs could provide valuable insight into structure and operation and may represent opportunities to address CE challenges. The purpose of this study is to describe how PT programs are using CE DM systems to inform recommendations for CE DM and support knowledge sharing and DDDM. SUBJECTS: CE faculty and administrators were recruited from entry-level PT education programs to participate in a cross-sectional survey. METHODS: The authors designed a novel survey which included demographics and use of CE DM systems. Descriptive statistics and content analysis of narrative data were used to examine responses. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 220 academic PT programs in June 2021 with 111 respondents (50% response rate). Respondents use multiple systems to complete CE tasks (e.g., placement process, on-boarding, agreement tracking, as a CE site database). Forty-three percent (n=47) use one system, 76% (n=35) of those use the same Software as a Service vendor. Eighty-six percent (n=96) are satisfied with their current CE DM system. Respondents enter data related to CE site information, CE environment, length of the CE experience, and accreditation-required clinical instructor information. Ninety-four percent (n=93) and 70% (n=70) extract data to make decisions about the placement process and curriculum, respectively. CONCLUSION: While variability across CE DM systems presents a challenge, survey respondents indicated common practices related to functionality, data entry, and extraction. Clinical education DM systems house critical data to address challenges in CE. Strategies to improve accessibility and use of this data to support DDDM should be explored.

Facilitators and Barriers to Providing Clinical Education Experiences Through the Lens of Clinical Stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: Although the provision of clinical education (CE) experiences affords many benefits to clinical stakeholders, little published literature exists regarding the factors influencing decisions of site coordinators of CE (SCCE), clinical administrators, and clinical instructors (CI) to provide CE. REVIEW OF LITERATURE: Site coordinators of CE and CIs navigate workplace expectations while making decisions about their engagement in CE experiences. The purpose of this study was to determine clinical stakeholders' perceptions of facilitators and barriers to the provision of CE experiences for entry-level Doctor of Physical Therapy students. SUBJECTS: This study used survey data from a previous study on perspectives related to payment for CE experiences. The survey questions analyzed included responses provided by 501 clinical administrators, 445 SCCEs, and 657 CIs. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of survey data included frequencies and percentages of responses for nominal and categorical data. Open-ended survey questions underwent content analysis to identify overarching concepts and subordinate categories. RESULTS: Clinicians are most motivated to serve as CIs by "enjoyment of teaching" (274, 49.4%) and a sense of "professional responsibility" (147, 26.5%). Site coordinators of CEs indicated that the top challenges faced in soliciting CIs were the ability to manage challenging students (347, 69.0%), lack of experience serving as a CI (227, 63.4%), ability to maintain productivity standards (220, 61.5%), and clinician burnout (219, 61.2%). Although all participants agreed that their organization promotes a culture of teaching, clinical administrators agreed at a higher percentage than SCCEs (97.8% vs 94.3%, respectively). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Clinical instructors identified values and benefits that were, at times, in contrast to the organizational culture. The discrepancies in perceptions among stakeholders that were uncovered by this research provide a unique lens that has not been addressed in the literature to date. To provide meaningful support for CIs, it is imperative that directors of CEs, clinical administrators, and SCCEs clearly understand the perceptions of the CI.

Effects of Modified Instructions on Peabody Developmental Motor Scales, Second Edition, Gross Motor Scores in Children with Typical Development.

Aims: The current study assessed whether modifying instructions on the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales, Second Edition (PDMS-2) affected scores in children with typical development. Methods: The gross motor portion of the PDMS-2 was administered twice, 2-10 days apart, to 38 children. Age- and gender-matched groups received instructions in both standard and modified formats, with order depending on group assignment. Results: Gross Motor Quotient results showed an effect for instruction type (p = .03) and an interaction between instruction type and order (p = .02). Improved scores for those given modified instructions during the second session indicated the interaction favored modifications. Stationary scores showed an effect for instruction type (p = .01) and an interaction between instruction type and age (p = .02). Object Manipulation scores showed an interaction between instruction type and order only (p =.002); Locomotion scores showed no significant changes (p = .25). Percentile rank changes ranged from 9% to 22% across subtests. Conclusions: Findings suggested instruction modifications may change PDMS-2 gross motor scores, even in children with typical development. Findings also suggested normative scores should not be reported if modifications were used during testing. Research is needed to determine optimal cues for the best representation of true motor ability during standardized assessment.

Collaborations in Clinical Education: Coordinating Top-Down and Bottom-Up Efforts to Advance Best Practices in Physical Therapist Education.

BACKGROUND: Preparing students for today's healthcare environment requires visionary leadership and strategic implementation at the grassroots level. This paper describes the process used in physical therapy (PT) to gather information about regional clinical education consortia, enhance networking, and improve connectivity with national initiatives. PROCESS: Twenty consortia shared information about their structures, processes, and outcomes during small-group discussions using a mixed methods approach. Two additional consortia were later identified and interviewed. FINDINGS: Consortia structure varied, but an average lifespan of 27 yrs with limited turnover was noted. Most consortia included both academic/clinical educators and PT/PTA educators. Commonly reported processes included holding meetings, serving as peer network, mentoring new members, and collaborating on research. The most frequent outcome was education of stakeholders. Consortia supported national initiatives but voiced need for more engagement at the grassroots level. DISCUSSION: Regional consortia play a vital role in shaping the future of clinical education but increased coordination between top-down and bottom-up efforts is needed. Recommendations were developed to use technologies, develop systematic communications, facilitate regional and national networks, and promote inclusion of all stakeholders. CONCLUSION: A systematic process engaging grassroots organizations can prove valuable for coordinating top-down and bottom-up efforts in all health professions.

Effect of Group Setting on Gross Motor Performance in Children 3-5 Years Old with Motor Delays.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in gross motor performance of children 3-5 years of age with motor delays when assessed individually compared to assessment in a group setting among peers with typical development (TD). METHODS: Twenty children with motor delays and 42 children with TD were recruited from a preschool program. A within-subject repeated measures design was used; each child with delay was tested both in an individual setting and in a group setting with two to four peers with TD. Testing sessions were completed 4-8 days apart. Ten different motor skills from the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 were administered. Performance of each item was videotaped and scored by a blinded researcher. RESULTS: Overall gross motor performance was significantly different (p < .05) between the two settings, with 14 of 20 children demonstrating better performance in the group setting. In particular, children performed better on locomotion items (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The higher scores for locomotion in the group setting may be due to the influence of competition, motivation, or modeling. Assessing a child in a group setting is recommended as part of the evaluation process.