Supervisor experiences of extended clinical placements in optometry: a mixed methods study.
Clinical placements
Education
Rural
Students
Supervisors
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Dec 2022
09 Dec 2022
Historique:
received:
23
05
2022
accepted:
23
11
2022
entrez:
9
12
2022
pubmed:
10
12
2022
medline:
15
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In Australia, optometry students have traditionally undertaken their clinical training in short-block rotations at University-led teaching clinics in metropolitan locations. Demand for clinical placements is growing as the number of optometry students steadily increases. As such, universities and clinical education providers must look for more diverse methods of student placement. Extended clinical placements in community-based settings are one alternative: a model similar to the longitudinal clerkships in medicine. This study aimed to explore the experience of extended clinical placements from the perspective of the optometrists who supervised students. It also sought to determine whether there were differences in views between metropolitan and rural practitioners. This mixed methods study included a survey and interviews with optometrists who had previously supervised Deakin University optometry students on an extended 26-week (2 x 13-weeks) clinical placement. Lines of enquiry focused on; the benefits and challenges associated with extended placements; areas for improvement; duration of the placement; and willingness to supervise further students. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Braun and Clarke's 6 step method of thematic analysis with a qualitative descriptive approach. Supervisors felt that hosting a student prompted greater reflective practice and critical appraisal of clinical decisions. The extended nature of the placement was thought to foster greater immersion in the clinical setting and community for the students and establish a stronger relationship between supervisor and student. Supervisors recognised the importance of role-modelling and mentoring the next generation of optometrists however noted that taking on a student was a sizeable commitment. Willingness to host a student was not dependent on the supervisor's location (rural vs metropolitan) p = 0.57. However, interviews uncovered motivations that were unique to supervisors residing in rural locations, such as succession planning. Overall, supervisors were positive about the value of student extended clinical placement in optometry and felt that it was a fulfilling and professionally beneficial experience. Lack of time and financial remuneration were the key downsides highlighted. Schools of optometry might carefully consider engaging in discussion about the duration of such placements, but 26 weeks was considered appropriate by supervisors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In Australia, optometry students have traditionally undertaken their clinical training in short-block rotations at University-led teaching clinics in metropolitan locations. Demand for clinical placements is growing as the number of optometry students steadily increases. As such, universities and clinical education providers must look for more diverse methods of student placement. Extended clinical placements in community-based settings are one alternative: a model similar to the longitudinal clerkships in medicine. This study aimed to explore the experience of extended clinical placements from the perspective of the optometrists who supervised students. It also sought to determine whether there were differences in views between metropolitan and rural practitioners.
METHODS
METHODS
This mixed methods study included a survey and interviews with optometrists who had previously supervised Deakin University optometry students on an extended 26-week (2 x 13-weeks) clinical placement. Lines of enquiry focused on; the benefits and challenges associated with extended placements; areas for improvement; duration of the placement; and willingness to supervise further students. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Braun and Clarke's 6 step method of thematic analysis with a qualitative descriptive approach.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Supervisors felt that hosting a student prompted greater reflective practice and critical appraisal of clinical decisions. The extended nature of the placement was thought to foster greater immersion in the clinical setting and community for the students and establish a stronger relationship between supervisor and student. Supervisors recognised the importance of role-modelling and mentoring the next generation of optometrists however noted that taking on a student was a sizeable commitment. Willingness to host a student was not dependent on the supervisor's location (rural vs metropolitan) p = 0.57. However, interviews uncovered motivations that were unique to supervisors residing in rural locations, such as succession planning.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, supervisors were positive about the value of student extended clinical placement in optometry and felt that it was a fulfilling and professionally beneficial experience. Lack of time and financial remuneration were the key downsides highlighted. Schools of optometry might carefully consider engaging in discussion about the duration of such placements, but 26 weeks was considered appropriate by supervisors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36494684
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03918-2
pii: 10.1186/s12909-022-03918-2
pmc: PMC9733108
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
854Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Sep 5;20(1):834
pubmed: 32891144
Aust Health Rev. 2020 Feb;44(1):39-46
pubmed: 30463661
Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40
pubmed: 10940958
Rural Remote Health. 2001 Jan-Dec;1(1):83
pubmed: 15869365
BMC Med Educ. 2012 Nov 13;12:112
pubmed: 23145840
Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2017 Nov 24;4:2333393617742282
pubmed: 29204457
Med Educ. 2011 May;45(5):455-63
pubmed: 21486321
Med Teach. 2013 Aug;35(8):e1340-64
pubmed: 23848374
Clin Exp Optom. 2016 May;99(3):248-57
pubmed: 26889764
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2018 Jun 20;20:e35
pubmed: 29921342
Clin Exp Optom. 2021 Mar;104(2):222-228
pubmed: 32783294
Clin Exp Optom. 2011 Sep;94(5):468-77
pubmed: 21426397
Perspect Med Educ. 2020 Feb;9(1):5-19
pubmed: 31953655
Med Teach. 2013 Dec;35(12):989-95
pubmed: 23883396
Medsurg Nurs. 2016 Nov;25(6):435-6
pubmed: 30304614
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Jan 25;22(1):59
pubmed: 35078456
Med Teach. 2017 May;39(5):527-534
pubmed: 28281378
Med Educ. 2012 Feb;46(2):179-91
pubmed: 22239332
Aust J Rural Health. 2014 Aug;22(4):179-88
pubmed: 25123622
Med Educ. 2012 Nov;46(11):1028-41
pubmed: 23078680
Acad Med. 2017 Nov;92(11S Association of American Medical Colleges Learn Serve Lead: P):S55-S60
pubmed: 29065024
Med J Aust. 2006 Jul 3;185(1):53-4
pubmed: 16813554
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Jul 16;9:52
pubmed: 19607668
Clin Teach. 2016 Jun;13(3):213-8
pubmed: 27146222
Clin Exp Optom. 2019 Nov;102(6):566-570
pubmed: 30801801
Med J Aust. 2011 Jun 6;194(11):S101-4
pubmed: 21644851
Hum Resour Health. 2015 May 06;13:27
pubmed: 25943870