File
Sattelmayer M1,2, Jagadamma K1, Hilfiker R2, Baer G1
1Queen Margaret University, School of Health Sciences, Physiotherapy, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 2HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Western Switzerland, Physiotherapy, Leukerbad, Switzerland
Background: Procedural skills are a central element in the education of future physiotherapists. Procedural skills relate to the execution of a practical task such as performing a soft tissue mobilisation or teaching a person with a stroke to perform a safe transfer to ground. Incorrectly performed procedures may result in serious problems and adverse events to patients and health professionals. New procedures are developed constantly, which requires that educational programmes either increase the amount of taught procedures in their curricula or select new procedures and discard existing procedures. This dilemma highlights the need for effective and feasible methods to support learners and educators. Several strategies have been introduced to respond to this challenge. For example, internet-based learning applications or virtual reality simulation are increasingly used. However, the use of those require considerable resources. A teaching intervention, which requires considerably less resources is mental practice. Mental practice is increasingly used in medical education to support the acquisition of procedural skills. No data regarding the effectiveness of mental practice in procedural skill acquisition in physiotherapy education is available.
Purpose: The purpose of this randomised controlled trial was to explore the effectiveness and feasibility of mental practice on procedural skill acquisition in physiotherapy education.
Methods: Two procedures were selected to evaluate the mental practice intervention. Procedure 1 was a transfer to the ground with a stroke patient and the second procedure was a set of vestibular rehabilitation techniques. Participants were randomised to either a mental practice (combined mental and physical practice) or no mental practice (physical practice) procedural skills training group. The mental practice script was developed with the help of experienced physiotherapists and validated a priori in a pilot study. Participant performance in skill application was measured post-acquisition and after a retention interval of two weeks.
Results: 37 students of an undergraduate physiotherapy programme were included in the study (18 for procedure 1 and 19 for procedure 2). Analyses for both procedures were in favour of the mental practice group with a moderate effect size (r: -0.3 for procedure 1 - transfer and r: -0.29 for procedure 2 - vestibular rehabilitation) at post-acquisition testing. A Wilkinson's rank-sum testtest showed that neither analysis was statistically significant. Findings of the retention test showed a similar performance between groups with no statistically significant difference. The feasibility of the study was high on all assessed feasibility items (i.e. recruitment rate, failure rate, feasibility of the training sessions, time and outcome assessment).
Conclusion(s): The potential superiority of the mental practice intervention analysed in this study is supported by evidence from studies performed in medical education. Mental practice requires less resources than other educational interventions (e.g. technological based intervention) and is therefore a pragmatic choice.
Implications: It seems plausible that mental practice can be used to increase acquisition of complex procedures in physiotherapy education. However, the findings of this study should be validated in a follow up study with a considerably larger sample size.
Keywords: Procedural skills, mental practice, physiotherapy education
Funding acknowledgements: This study was not funded.
Purpose: The purpose of this randomised controlled trial was to explore the effectiveness and feasibility of mental practice on procedural skill acquisition in physiotherapy education.
Methods: Two procedures were selected to evaluate the mental practice intervention. Procedure 1 was a transfer to the ground with a stroke patient and the second procedure was a set of vestibular rehabilitation techniques. Participants were randomised to either a mental practice (combined mental and physical practice) or no mental practice (physical practice) procedural skills training group. The mental practice script was developed with the help of experienced physiotherapists and validated a priori in a pilot study. Participant performance in skill application was measured post-acquisition and after a retention interval of two weeks.
Results: 37 students of an undergraduate physiotherapy programme were included in the study (18 for procedure 1 and 19 for procedure 2). Analyses for both procedures were in favour of the mental practice group with a moderate effect size (r: -0.3 for procedure 1 - transfer and r: -0.29 for procedure 2 - vestibular rehabilitation) at post-acquisition testing. A Wilkinson's rank-sum testtest showed that neither analysis was statistically significant. Findings of the retention test showed a similar performance between groups with no statistically significant difference. The feasibility of the study was high on all assessed feasibility items (i.e. recruitment rate, failure rate, feasibility of the training sessions, time and outcome assessment).
Conclusion(s): The potential superiority of the mental practice intervention analysed in this study is supported by evidence from studies performed in medical education. Mental practice requires less resources than other educational interventions (e.g. technological based intervention) and is therefore a pragmatic choice.
Implications: It seems plausible that mental practice can be used to increase acquisition of complex procedures in physiotherapy education. However, the findings of this study should be validated in a follow up study with a considerably larger sample size.
Keywords: Procedural skills, mental practice, physiotherapy education
Funding acknowledgements: This study was not funded.
Topic: Education; Education
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Queen Margaret University
Ethics committee: Research Ethics Panel
Ethics number: 42775
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
