Occupational Therapy Students' Evidence-Based Practice Skills as Reported in a Mobile App: Cross-Sectional Study.
active learning strategies
application
cross-sectional study
development
education
higher education
interactive
mobile app
mobile application
occupational therapy
occupational therapy students
students
usability
use
Journal
JMIR medical education
ISSN: 2369-3762
Titre abrégé: JMIR Med Educ
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101684518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Feb 2024
21 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
26
04
2023
accepted:
29
01
2024
revised:
18
09
2023
medline:
21
2
2024
pubmed:
21
2
2024
entrez:
21
2
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an important aspect of the health care education curriculum. EBP involves following the 5 EBP steps: ask, assess, appraise, apply, and audit. These 5 steps reflect the suggested core competencies covered in teaching and learning programs to support future health care professionals applying EBP. When implementing EBP teaching, assessing outcomes by documenting the student's performance and skills is relevant. This can be done using mobile devices. The aim of this study was to assess occupational therapy students' EBP skills as reported in a mobile app. We applied a cross-sectional design. Descriptive statistics were used to present frequencies, percentages, means, and ranges of data regarding EBP skills found in the EBPsteps app. Associations between students' ability to formulate the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome/Population, Interest, and Context (PICO/PICo) elements and identifying relevant research evidence were analyzed with the chi-square test. Of 4 cohorts with 150 students, 119 (79.3%) students used the app and produced 240 critically appraised topics (CATs) in the app. The EBP steps "ask," "assess," and "appraise" were often correctly performed. The clinical question was formulated correctly in 53.3% (128/240) of the CATs, and students identified research evidence in 81.2% (195/240) of the CATs. Critical appraisal checklists were used in 81.2% (195/240) of the CATs, and most of these checklists were assessed as relevant for the type of research evidence identified (165/195, 84.6%). The least frequently correctly reported steps were "apply" and "audit." In 39.6% (95/240) of the CATs, it was reported that research evidence was applied. Only 61% (58/95) of these CATs described how the research was applied to clinical practice. Evaluation of practice changes was reported in 38.8% (93/240) of the CATs. However, details about practice changes were lacking in all these CATs. A positive association was found between correctly reporting the "population" and "interventions/interest" elements of the PICO/PICo and identifying research evidence (P<.001). We assessed the students' EBP skills based on how they documented following the EBP steps in the EBPsteps app, and our results showed variations in how well the students mastered the steps. "Apply" and "audit" were the most difficult EBP steps for the students to perform, and this finding has implications and gives directions for further development of the app and educational instruction in EBP. The EBPsteps app is a new and relevant app for students to learn and practice EBP, and it can be used to assess students' EBP skills objectively.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an important aspect of the health care education curriculum. EBP involves following the 5 EBP steps: ask, assess, appraise, apply, and audit. These 5 steps reflect the suggested core competencies covered in teaching and learning programs to support future health care professionals applying EBP. When implementing EBP teaching, assessing outcomes by documenting the student's performance and skills is relevant. This can be done using mobile devices.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess occupational therapy students' EBP skills as reported in a mobile app.
METHODS
METHODS
We applied a cross-sectional design. Descriptive statistics were used to present frequencies, percentages, means, and ranges of data regarding EBP skills found in the EBPsteps app. Associations between students' ability to formulate the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome/Population, Interest, and Context (PICO/PICo) elements and identifying relevant research evidence were analyzed with the chi-square test.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 4 cohorts with 150 students, 119 (79.3%) students used the app and produced 240 critically appraised topics (CATs) in the app. The EBP steps "ask," "assess," and "appraise" were often correctly performed. The clinical question was formulated correctly in 53.3% (128/240) of the CATs, and students identified research evidence in 81.2% (195/240) of the CATs. Critical appraisal checklists were used in 81.2% (195/240) of the CATs, and most of these checklists were assessed as relevant for the type of research evidence identified (165/195, 84.6%). The least frequently correctly reported steps were "apply" and "audit." In 39.6% (95/240) of the CATs, it was reported that research evidence was applied. Only 61% (58/95) of these CATs described how the research was applied to clinical practice. Evaluation of practice changes was reported in 38.8% (93/240) of the CATs. However, details about practice changes were lacking in all these CATs. A positive association was found between correctly reporting the "population" and "interventions/interest" elements of the PICO/PICo and identifying research evidence (P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We assessed the students' EBP skills based on how they documented following the EBP steps in the EBPsteps app, and our results showed variations in how well the students mastered the steps. "Apply" and "audit" were the most difficult EBP steps for the students to perform, and this finding has implications and gives directions for further development of the app and educational instruction in EBP. The EBPsteps app is a new and relevant app for students to learn and practice EBP, and it can be used to assess students' EBP skills objectively.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38381475
pii: v10i1e48507
doi: 10.2196/48507
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e48507Informations de copyright
©Susanne G Johnson, Birgitte Espehaug, Lillebeth Larun, Donna Ciliska, Nina Rydland Olsen. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (https://mededu.jmir.org), 21.02.2024.