A tool to evaluate physiotherapy clinical education in South Africa.
Vaneshveri Naidoo, Aimée V Stewart, Morake E D Maleka
PMID 36092966WHAT IT FOUND
A new tool for evaluating physiotherapy clinical education programmes was developed and tested.
It was deemed useful and feasible by most respondents, but its length (58 questions) was its main drawback. The tool has not yet been tested for its ability to predict student outcomes.
Key findings
01The final tool contains 58 questions across six sections, developed through a three-phase process involving focus groups, a Delphi consensus, and factor analysis.
02Respondents found the tool useful (88%) and comprehensive, but identified its length as the major drawback (35% of respondents).
03The tool showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.75) in a small sample of five completed questionnaires.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The factor analysis and internal consistency data were based on only five completed questionnaires, which is a very small sample for validating a 73-item tool. The tool is self-administered and subjective, relying on the perceptions of educators and managers rather than objective student outcome data. The study did not test whether using this tool actually improves student learning or clinical competence. The length of the tool (58 questions) may limit its practical adoption, as noted by respondents.
Declared interests
The first author is a clinical co-ordinator, which may introduce bias in the interpretation of qualitative data and the final organisation of the tool sections, though the authors state this was mitigated by member checks and co-coders.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this tool measures student competence or clinical outcomes. It evaluates the structure and processes of the education programme itself. Furthermore, the statistical validation (internal consistency) rests on a sample of only five respondents, so treat the psychometric claims with caution.