Development, Implementation and Evaluation of an Acute Care Physical Therapy 'Float' Placement during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Report.

Clinical education is a mandatory component of physical therapy curricula globally. COVID-19 disrupted clinical education, jeopardizing students' abilities to meet graduation requirements. The objective of this case report is to outline the development, implementation and evaluation of a multiple clinical instructor (CI), multiple unit, acute care float clinical placement for a final year, entry-level physical therapy student and offer implementation recommendations. This placement included an eight-week, multiple CI (one primary, four supporting), multiple (five) unit clinical placement which was developed between St. Joseph's Healthcare and the McMaster University Masters of Science (Physiotherapy) Program between 10 August and 2 October 2020. Student evaluations and reflections by the student and CIs were collected and analyzed using interpretive description. Analysis from the reflections revealed six themes: (1) CI and student attributes; (2) increased feasibility; (3) varied exposure; (4) central communication and resources; (5) organization; and (6) managing expectations. An acute care clinical experience is required for students in Canadian entry-to-practice physical therapy programs. Due to COVID-19, placement opportunities were limited. The float placement allowed clinicians to offer supervision despite staff re-deployment and increased organizational and work-life pressures during the pandemic. This model provides an approach to extenuating circumstances and may also increase acute care placements during non-pandemic times for physical therapy and other similarly structured healthcare professions.

A longitudinal Q-study to assess changes in students' perceptions at the time of pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic forced many universities and colleges to rapidly adopt online course delivery. As with any new foray, realizing the optimal aspects of a course to change became incredibly important for course instructors. In this study, we used a particularly sensitive method, i.e. Q-methodology, to evaluate changes based on students' perceptions from fall 2020 to winter 2021. Q-methodology is commonly used to uncover shared values, opinions, and preferences. Using Q-methodology, students participating in both semesters of an undergraduate anatomy and physiology course were surveyed in fall 2020 and winter 2021. The Q-sample included 44 statements. Data from fall 2020 were treated as the baseline and changes in students' perceptions from 2020 to 2021 were assessed. In total, 31 students completed both fall 2020 and winter 2021 course evaluations. Three salient factors emerged from the fall 2020 evaluation: Overtaxed students, Solo Achievers, and In-Person Learners. At the baseline, students were concerned mostly about the delivery of the course, then the winter 2021 evaluation showed how they were adjusting to online learning. The longitudinal Q-study proved to be robust in identifying changes in perceptions. These granular findings indicate how students might differ in viewing and evaluating online courses. This methodology can be used in redesigning and restructuring different components of an online course in higher education settings.

Piloting an interprofessional virtual cadaveric dissection course: Responding to COVID-19.

Interprofessional learning improves students' clinical and interprofessional competencies. COVID-19 prevented delivering in-person education and motivated the development of a virtual interprofessional cadaveric dissection (ICD) course. This study reports on the effects of a virtual ICD course compared to a previously delivered in-person course, on students' readiness for, and perceptions about, interprofessional learning. Students attending the ICD course in-person (2019-2020) or virtually (2020-2021) completed the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) and the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). Students in the virtual course also provided written feedback. Thirty-two (24 women; Median: 24 [Q1-Q3: 22-25] years) and 23 students (18 women; 22 [21-23] years) attended the in-person and virtual courses, respectively. In the virtual cohort, the RIPLS total score (82 [76-87] vs. 85 [78-90]; p = 0.034) and the roles and responsibilities sub-score (11 [9-12] vs. 12 [11-13]; p = 0.001) improved significantly. In the in-person cohort, the roles and responsibilities sub-score improved significantly (12 [10-14] vs. 13 [11-14]; p = 0.017). No significant differences were observed between cohorts (p < 0.05). Themes identified in the qualitative analysis were advantages and positive experiences, competencies acquired, disadvantages and challenges, and preferences and suggestions. In-person and virtual ICD courses seem to have similar effects on students' interprofessional learning. However, students reported preferring the in-person setting for learning anatomy-dissection skills.