Abstract
BackgroundUsing simulated learning environments with standardised patients (SPs) provides a way to scaffold the development of skills for patient safety in a low risk environment. There are no data regarding whether adding SP interactions in early years of physiotherapy training improves safe performance on clinical placement. We assessed the feasibility of recruiting and collecting data from junior physiotherapy students during an SP workshop with a pilot non-randomised trial, also assessing time, cost and scheduling information.MethodsSecond year physiotherapy students were invited to participate and allocated to either the SP workshop in a simulated hospital environment (with and without video feedback) or usual teaching comprising peer role play. The main outcome measures were participant recruitment, retention and survey response rates, whether the training and workshops were delivered as scheduled and costs for SPs and staff training and workshop attendance. Students self-reported confidence, communication, preparedness for clinic and satisfaction was measured using pre-post surveys.ResultsThe pilot trial proved feasible, with 108 students recruited (100%) and high retention (95%) and survey response rates (85%). The training sessions and SP workshops were delivered as scheduled, costing $4700AUD. Students rated their confidence and preparedness for clinical placement higher post intervention (p < 0.001) with high levels of satisfaction with the SP interactions (mean score 9.3/10).ConclusionsIn this setting the SP workshop was feasible. Further research incorporating a randomised trial investigating the integration of SPs for the development and assessment of patient safety skills in physiotherapy education is recommended.Trial registrationANZCTR no: 12,615,000,686,505.
Highlights
Using simulated learning environments with standardised patients (SPs) provides a way to scaffold the development of skills for patient safety in a low risk environment
The primary aims of this pilot study were to evaluate (1) feasibility, including the process and resource requirements, of conducting a practical workshop with SPs in a clinical scenario with and without video feedback; (2) participant satisfaction with the SP interactions, and ratings of confidence, perceived preparedness for clinical placement; (3) whether optional video feedback impacted on student confidence, perceived preparedness for clinical placement and (4) whether any differences were observed in objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) scores, number of student fail grades between students interacting with SP scenarios compared with usual peer role play scenarios
The time spent for training and delivery for the SP workshops was approximately 80 h, comprising 20 h for preintervention training (15 h SPs, 5 h clinical educators) and 60 h for the intervention (30 h each SP and clinical educator time)
Summary
Design This pilot study used a non-randomised controlled design. The study conditions were either (A) SP scenario in simulated hospital environment with SP. Condition C: Peer role play scenario session Participants worked in groups of four to role-play the same case scenario As this followed usual teaching practice, the use of a simulated environment was not included (plinth not hospital bed, no attachments), and students took on the role of the patient. The process requirements evaluated were participant recruitment, retention and survey response rates and whether the training for clinical educators and SPs and workshop sessions for SP interactions including the debriefing and feedback (from the SP and video) were able to be delivered as planned. Practical examination mark As part of usual course requirements, all participants were assessed in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) on skills relevant to safe mobilisation of a patient including assessment and manual handling This took place at the end of semester, 5 weeks after the study intervention workshop day. Organisation of extracts into categories was discussed with a second researcher (KJ) until consensus was reached and a descriptive summary generated including examples of data excerpts to illustrate the categories
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
