Quality in Physical Therapist Clinical Education: A Systematic Review

被引:30
作者
McCallum, Christine A. [1 ]
Mosher, Peter D. [2 ]
Jacobson, Peri J. [3 ]
Gallivan, Sean P. [4 ]
Giuffre, Suzanne M. [5 ]
机构
[1] Walsh Univ, Div Phys Therapy, North Canton, OH 44720 USA
[2] Coll Mt St Joseph, Dept Phys Therapy, Cincinnati, OH USA
[3] Bellarmine Univ, Phys Therapy Program, Louisville, KY USA
[4] Univ Dayton, Phys Therapy Program, Dayton, OH 45469 USA
[5] Youngstown State Univ, Dept Phys Therapy, Youngstown, OH 44555 USA
来源
PHYSICAL THERAPY | 2013年 / 93卷 / 10期
关键词
PHYSIOTHERAPY STUDENTS; PRODUCTIVITY; PERCEPTIONS; PERFORMANCE; INSTRUCTORS; BEHAVIORS;
D O I
10.2522/ptj.20120410
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
100224 [整形外科学];
摘要
Background. Many factors affect student learning throughout the clinical education (CE) component of professional (entry-level) physical therapist education curricula. Physical therapist education programs (PTEPs) manage CE, yet the material and human resources required to provide CE are generally overseen by community-based physical therapist practices. Purpose. The purposes of this systematic review were: (1) to examine how the construct of quality is defined in CE literature and (2) to determine the methodological rigor of the available evidence on quality in physical therapist CE. Methods. This study was a systematic review of English-language journals using the American Physical Therapy Association's Open Door Portal to Evidence-Based Practice as the computer search engine The search was categorized using terms for physical therapy and quality and for CE pedagogy and models or roles. Summary findings were characterized by 5 primary themes and 14 subthemes using a qualitative-directed content analysis. Results. Fifty-four articles were included in the study. The primary quality themes were: CE framework, CE sites, structure of CE, assessment in CE, and CE faculty. The methodological rigor of the studies was critically appraised using a binary system based on the McMaster appraisal tools. Scores ranged from 3 to 14. Limitations. Publication bias and outcome reporting bias may be inherent limitations to the results. Conclusion. The review found inconclusive evidence about what constitutes quality or best practice for physical therapist CE. Five key constructs,of CE were identified that, when aggregated, could construe quality.
引用
收藏
页码:1298 / 1311
页数:14
相关论文
共 72 条
[1]
[Anonymous], ASIA PAC DISABIL REH
[2]
[Anonymous], Occupational Therapy: Enabling Function and Well-Being
[3]
[Anonymous], EV CRIT ACCR ED PROG
[4]
[Anonymous], 1994, QUALITATIVE ANAL EXP
[5]
[Anonymous], J PHYS THER ED
[6]
[Anonymous], ED RES QUEST RANK PR
[7]
[Anonymous], 2011 2012 FACT SHEET
[8]
[Anonymous], CLIN MANAGE PHYS THE
[9]
[Anonymous], 2003, PHYSIOTHERAPY, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0031-9406(05)60152-6
[10]
[Anonymous], OP DOOR APTAS PORT E