OPTIMISING TRANSITION TO PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE YEAR IN 4TH YEAR PHYSIOTHERAPY STUDENTS

File
Danks M1, Czerniec S2, Constantinou M1
1Australian Catholic University, School of Allied Health, Brisbane, Australia, 2Macquarie University, Department of Medicine, Sydney, Australia

Background: Increasing numbers of students face significant difficulties in transitioning from on campus foundation physiotherapy courses to 4th year clinical practice units. Some students have difficulty transitioning into this work integrated learning context with high levels of stress for some students, withdrawal from some allocated placements and/or referral of students for treatment of anxiety related disorders. Challenges in transitioning to clinical placement has also resulted in inadequate student performance in some professional practice placements and repeating of multiple placements for some students. As there is limited ability and capacity to support clinical placement students reactively, investigation into development of effective learning and teaching resources to proactively address the challenge of transitioning to professional practice is needed.
The successful transition of 4th year physiotherapy students to the experiential learning of their professional practice year is challenging as it is dependent on developing clinical reasoning to translate prior learning to problem solve, plan and manage interventions in a real world context. Guided critical reflection may support successful transition to clinical placement as critical reflection is effective in supporting both the higher level cognition and self-directed learning required for clinical reasoning as well as the affective and ethical development of the professional health practitioner (Mann, 2016).

Purpose: This investigation into the 4th year physiotherapy students' learning needs identifies stressors and perceived learning needs of 4th year physiotherapy students transitioning into their professional practice year. Student responses inform scaffolded critical reflective practice initiatives to support successful student professional practice year experience and outcomes.

Methods: This cross-sectional, mixed methods study design uses qualitative and quantitative data across 3 phases.
Phase 1 investigates key student concerns and learning needs using qualitative and quantitative data collection regarding 'stressors' and students' perceived learning needs as self-directed learners in an experiential learning context.
Phase 2 Development of scaffolded critical reflective practice task: thematic analysis of Phase 1 qualitative data used to modify and augment structured critical reflection learning activities.
Phase 2 data collection:
· Qualitative data: phenomenological analysis of the consenting students' submitted critical reflection of practice.
· Quantitative data: clinical supervisors' ratings of the students' competency with clinical practice, communication and professionalism will be collected using the Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice measure (Dalton, 2011).
Phase 3 Quantitative measure of student ratings of confidence in professional practice post critical reflection of professional practice.

Results: 4th year physiotherapy students (n = 162) participated in the study. Student rating of confidence to generalize prior learning to a range of clinical problems improved from 23.45% with poor confidence to 6.4% with poor confidence post structured critical reflection. Emergence of higher level learning taxonomy evident in the structured critical reflection student submissions was analyzed using thematic analysis of submissions.

Conclusion(s): Development of tailored critical reflection teaching resources improved student confidence and competence with clinical reasoning in professional practice placements.

Implications: Successful transition to clinical placement is supported by guided critical reflection of professional practice.

Keywords: Reflection, Clinical reasoning, Professional practice

Funding acknowledgements: An Australian Catholic University Teaching Development Grant provided financial support for this research.

Topic: Education; Education: clinical; Professionalism & ethics

Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Australian Catholic University
Ethics committee: Australian Catholic University Human Research Ethics Committee
Ethics number: 2017-208E


All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.

Back to the listing