Simulation-Based Education in Physical Therapist Education: A Survey of Current Practice.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to describe the current use of (1) simulation in student physical therapist professional education programs and (2) standards of best practice (SOBP) for simulation-based education (SBE) in physical therapist education. METHODS: Two surveys were created about current use of SBE in student physical therapist professional education programs in the United States. The first survey contained questions about the program, including the best contact person regarding simulation. The second survey investigated simulation use within the context of SOBP. Survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Survey 1 was sent to the program director at all fully accredited physical therapist programs (N = 236), and 143 responses were returned (61% response rate). Survey 2 was sent to the 136 individuals identified in Survey 1, and we received 81 completed surveys (60%). Over 90% of programs reported including SBE in their curricula, with 86% providing 3 or more experiences. A median of 1 core faculty at each program reported training in SBE, but 23% reported no training. A lack of training in specific elements of the SOBP for SBE was reported by 40% to 50% of faculty. Limited use of SOBP was reported, and use of outcome measures without validation was common. CONCLUSION: Although SBE is commonly used in physical therapist education, many faculties (1) do not have training in SBE, (2) do not consistently follow the SOBP, and (3) utilize unvalidated outcome measures. Limited faculty training in SBE and inconsistent inclusion of the SOBP suggest student learning in simulation is not optimized. IMPACT: These results show that, despite increased use of simulation in physical therapist education programs, there is a dearth of faculty trained in SBE and inconsistent use of SOBP. Addressing these deficiencies could help to optimize the benefits of SBE in physical therapist education.

Simulation-Based Education in Physical Therapist Education: Perspectives From the Strategic Initiative Panel on Simulation in Physical Therapist Education.

In the summer of 2018, The American Council of Academic Physical Therapy appointed 9 individuals versed in simulation education to form the Strategic Initiative Panel on Simulation to (1) investigate the use of simulation in physical therapist education, (2) explore the role of simulation in meeting accreditation standards and curriculum elements related to clinical education and interprofessional education, and (3) describe models and best practices for the use of simulation in physical therapist education. Over the 3 years of Strategic Initiative Panel on Simulation work, the panel identified several significant gaps in simulation education and research practice. This paper clarifies the essential elements required to optimize the delivery of simulation-based education in physical therapy following best practices, frames the existing challenges to move the profession forward, and recommends specific actions needed to address the many continued questions related to the effective use of simulation-based education in physical therapist education.

Simulation-Based Education in Physical Therapist Professional Education: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to (1) describe and summarize the use of simulation-based education (SBE) with student physical therapists in the international literature and (2) describe the application and integration of standards of best practice (SOBP) for SBE reported in published physical therapy education research. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ERIC databases were searched. The search included any published study that involved the use of SBE with student physical therapists. Because this was a scoping review, only descriptive statistics were compiled; no methodological quality assessment was performed. RESULTS: This scoping review revealed a significant increase in literature describing SBE with student physical therapists in the past 10 years. Simulation was used to address learning objectives across a variety of content areas and clinical settings. Communication skills were the most common objectives for simulation. Limited use of SOBP, published in 2016, was reported, and use of author-generated outcome measures without validation was common. CONCLUSIONS: Although there has been an increase in literature reporting the use of SBE with student physical therapists across many practice areas and settings, many articles reported limited use and integration of published SOBP and frequently utilized outcome measures that had not been validated. IMPACT: The findings show that limited use of validated outcome measures and SOBP constrain the capacity for reproducing studies, comparing findings among studies, and completing systematic reviews that could inform and optimize best practices for the use of SBE in physical therapist professional education. Further research on SBE in physical therapy would benefit from investigations that integrated and reported the use of SOBP for standardized patients, simulation design, and delivery and assessment of learning outcomes over time at multiple Kirkpatrick learning levels.

Clinical Experiences: Navigating the Intricacies of Student Placement Requirements.

Clinical apprenticeships, also called clinical experiences, are integral to most allied health (AH) student professional education. Clinical experiences begin the process of enculturating students into a healthcare profession where higher cognitive mastery of learned skills is supported through social interaction and scaffolding with an AH professional. In AH programs, clinical experiences for students are a necessity for programmatic accreditation; however, clinical sites have developed a range of requirements for students, which lead to a myriad of issues. These requirements may include drug screens, criminal background checks, and HIPAA training prior to a student beginning their clinical experience. Because of differing interpretation of policy, there is variability of requirements imposed on students before beginning these clinical experiences. This variability can create a financial burden on the student, who likely pays out-of-pocket for criminal background checks, vaccines, or drug screens. It also creates an administrative burden for clinical coordinators, who must know what each of the hundreds of clinical sites require, and they must follow up with each site to determine if these requirements have changed. Some strategies exist that may help clinical coordinators to manage clinical site requirements for student placement.