Guided self-study in preclinical physiotherapy students - A feasibility study.

higher education learning gain self-directed learning self-study teacher-centred instruction

Journal

The South African journal of physiotherapy
ISSN: 2410-8219
Titre abrégé: S Afr J Physiother
Pays: South Africa
ID NLM: 9816433

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 07 12 2022
accepted: 23 05 2023
medline: 6 11 2023
pubmed: 6 11 2023
entrez: 6 11 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Literature describing the impact of guided self-study (G-SS) in knowledge changes and skills improvements in undergraduate students is scarce. The aims of our study were to evaluate the feasibility of a G-SS programme in a full-time undergraduate physiotherapy degree course and to assess the effectiveness of the G-SS on changes in knowledge and development of skills (hands-on). Fifty-three first-semester undergraduate physiotherapy students were randomly divided into a G-SS group and a control group (CG). The G-SS group received six clinical cases and prepared each case during an 8-day cycle. The control group received self-study learning units of the original curriculum content. Primary outcome parameters were (1) time of task, (2) responsiveness of students and (3) programme differentiation. Knowledge changes and skills changes were tested using a multiple-choice questionnaire and the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Students' responsiveness was 32%. This was below the a priori set 83%. No differences in programme differentiation were found. The OSCE grade was significantly higher in the G-SS compared to CG ( The G-SS programme in its current form was not feasible regarding students' responsiveness. Therefore, a slight modification of our study protocol (e.g., better time planning in the academic calendar) is needed to improve students' willingness to participate in the G-SS programme. Adaptation of the school timetable should allow undergraduate physiotherapy students to prepare clinical cases under conditions of lower workload. Guided self-study as compared to CG is superior in knowledge change and (hands-on) skills improvement.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Literature describing the impact of guided self-study (G-SS) in knowledge changes and skills improvements in undergraduate students is scarce.
Objectives UNASSIGNED
The aims of our study were to evaluate the feasibility of a G-SS programme in a full-time undergraduate physiotherapy degree course and to assess the effectiveness of the G-SS on changes in knowledge and development of skills (hands-on).
Method UNASSIGNED
Fifty-three first-semester undergraduate physiotherapy students were randomly divided into a G-SS group and a control group (CG). The G-SS group received six clinical cases and prepared each case during an 8-day cycle. The control group received self-study learning units of the original curriculum content. Primary outcome parameters were (1) time of task, (2) responsiveness of students and (3) programme differentiation. Knowledge changes and skills changes were tested using a multiple-choice questionnaire and the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE).
Results UNASSIGNED
Students' responsiveness was 32%. This was below the a priori set 83%. No differences in programme differentiation were found. The OSCE grade was significantly higher in the G-SS compared to CG (
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
The G-SS programme in its current form was not feasible regarding students' responsiveness. Therefore, a slight modification of our study protocol (e.g., better time planning in the academic calendar) is needed to improve students' willingness to participate in the G-SS programme.
Clinical implications UNASSIGNED
Adaptation of the school timetable should allow undergraduate physiotherapy students to prepare clinical cases under conditions of lower workload. Guided self-study as compared to CG is superior in knowledge change and (hands-on) skills improvement.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37928647
doi: 10.4102/sajp.v79i1.1866
pii: SAJP-79-1866
pmc: PMC10623637
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

1866

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Authors.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

Références

Lancet. 2008 Jan 26;371(9609):281-3
pubmed: 18221781
J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2020 Jul 28;7:2382120520944921
pubmed: 32782931
Med Educ. 2010 Nov;44(11):1057-68
pubmed: 20946476
J Nurs Educ. 1998 May;37(5):228-31
pubmed: 9605200
BMC Med Educ. 2021 Jun 29;21(1):362
pubmed: 34187460
Acad Med. 1990 Dec;65(12):733-4
pubmed: 2252487
BMJ. 1999 Sep 11;319(7211):670-4
pubmed: 10480822
Med Educ. 1986 May;20(3):162-75
pubmed: 3724571
J Allied Health. 2017 Spring;46(1):26-35
pubmed: 28255594
Perspect Med Educ. 2014 Jan;3(1):61-62
pubmed: 24288126
Nurse Educ Today. 2003 Apr;23(3):202-10
pubmed: 12672388

Auteurs

Elisabeth Schenk (E)

School of Health Professions, Division of Physiotherapy, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.

Jan Taeymans (J)

School of Health Professions, Division of Physiotherapy, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.
Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.

Slavko Rogan (S)

School of Health Professions, Division of Physiotherapy, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.

Classifications MeSH