Moseley J1, Hellawell M1, Briggs A1, Graham C1, O'Brien C1
1University of Bradford, Faculty of Health Studies, Bradford, United Kingdom
Background: Clinical placements are an integral part of the education of physiotherapy students. It is during placements that students have the opportunity to put theory into practice, experience the reality of working, learn about professional values and beliefs as well as fulfil statutory requirements for registration with the relevant Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies. It has been long recognised that developing practice-based learning opportunities is essential to produce and sustain the future physiotherapy workforce. The policy of increasing physiotherapy training places and of funding practice placement provision, despite the efforts and loyalty of thousands of dedicated clinical educators, the profession can periodically suffer from a shortage of placements The exact number of placement shortages is largely unknown or perhaps more accurately unpublished.
There is no doubt that providing placements does provide challenges for a busy service. Managers and clinicians are under increasing strains from a variety of sources and it can be difficult to balance these while keeping the patients' needs at the centre of any placement activity. Like most aspects of service delivery, planning placements using the best available evidence will ensure that the impact on service delivery is minimised.
There is therefore a need to develop and evaluate clinical placement models that increase placement capacity, are cost-effective, efficient, instil a positive learning environment ensuring sound learning outcomes, provide appropriate facilities and resources, whilst maintaining quality patient care. No one model has all the answers to the challenges of providing clinical placements for physiotherapy students.
Purpose: To develop and evaluate the designated clinical educator model for the delivery of physical.
Methods: We placed 10 year 2 physiotherapy students in a UK University physiotherapy clinic under the direct supervision of one full time and one part time member of staff at a ratio 7.5 students to 1 staff member in a full time 5 week physiotherapy placement. The students worked collaboratively to manage neuromusculoskelatal patients in four cubicles. There was structured peer support put in place. Patient numbers were monitored as was patient satisfaction. Feedback was sought from all parties, patients through established patient satisfaction mechanisms and students through the usual student evaluation quality assurance processes.
Results: More patients were seen than could be seen by the qualified staff alone. Patient satisfaction was high. Student satisfaction was high and was amongst the best satisfaction scores when compared to the other clinical placements encountered by other physiotherapy students in the same cohort. The supervising staff reported a need to be very well organised but being able to concentrate solely on patients through the supervision of students offset most, if not all of the extra supervision required.
Conclusion(s): This placement model has proved to be successful using the outcomes measured and could now be rolled out and evaluated in other mainstream clinical placement environments.
Implications: The implications are that the dedicated clinical educator model could, where resources allow go some way to increasing the number of clinical placements whilst maintaining high patient and student satisfaction. This model clearly has the potential to be implemented into other physiotherapy environments.
Keywords: Clinical Placement Model, Physiotherapy Students, Placement Capacity
Funding acknowledgements: Not applicable
There is no doubt that providing placements does provide challenges for a busy service. Managers and clinicians are under increasing strains from a variety of sources and it can be difficult to balance these while keeping the patients' needs at the centre of any placement activity. Like most aspects of service delivery, planning placements using the best available evidence will ensure that the impact on service delivery is minimised.
There is therefore a need to develop and evaluate clinical placement models that increase placement capacity, are cost-effective, efficient, instil a positive learning environment ensuring sound learning outcomes, provide appropriate facilities and resources, whilst maintaining quality patient care. No one model has all the answers to the challenges of providing clinical placements for physiotherapy students.
Purpose: To develop and evaluate the designated clinical educator model for the delivery of physical.
Methods: We placed 10 year 2 physiotherapy students in a UK University physiotherapy clinic under the direct supervision of one full time and one part time member of staff at a ratio 7.5 students to 1 staff member in a full time 5 week physiotherapy placement. The students worked collaboratively to manage neuromusculoskelatal patients in four cubicles. There was structured peer support put in place. Patient numbers were monitored as was patient satisfaction. Feedback was sought from all parties, patients through established patient satisfaction mechanisms and students through the usual student evaluation quality assurance processes.
Results: More patients were seen than could be seen by the qualified staff alone. Patient satisfaction was high. Student satisfaction was high and was amongst the best satisfaction scores when compared to the other clinical placements encountered by other physiotherapy students in the same cohort. The supervising staff reported a need to be very well organised but being able to concentrate solely on patients through the supervision of students offset most, if not all of the extra supervision required.
Conclusion(s): This placement model has proved to be successful using the outcomes measured and could now be rolled out and evaluated in other mainstream clinical placement environments.
Implications: The implications are that the dedicated clinical educator model could, where resources allow go some way to increasing the number of clinical placements whilst maintaining high patient and student satisfaction. This model clearly has the potential to be implemented into other physiotherapy environments.
Keywords: Clinical Placement Model, Physiotherapy Students, Placement Capacity
Funding acknowledgements: Not applicable
Topic: Education: clinical; Education; Musculoskeletal
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: University of Bradford
Ethics committee: University ethics panel
Reason not required: Feedback through established placement quality assurance processes
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
