ABSTRACT
ISSUE: There is limited information and consensus on the future of clinical education. The Delphi technique was selected to identify agreement among Association of Schools of Allied Health Professions' (ASAHP) allied health deans on the future (2018-2023) of allied health (AH) clinical education. METHODS: Sixty-one AH deans, 54.9% (61 of 111) of the ASAHP membership, expressed opinions about clinical education through a three-round Delphi study. In conjunction with a conceptual model, four futuristic scenarios were used to encourage deans' feedback on the key factors impacting the future of clinical education. RESULTS: The responses to the four scenarios showed ways the external environment influences which activities the deans recommend. The results presented, by individual scenario and in totality, provide relevant and timely information on the importance and transformation of AH clinical education and its future. DISCUSSION: Futuristic scenarios, in combination with the Delphi technique, generated information where little exists specific to AH deans' perspectives on AH clinical education. The results offer deans opportunities for future strategic improvements. CONCLUSION: The use of the futuristic scenarios was suitable for guiding deans' responses and reaching agreement on the future of AH clinical education. These contributions reflect the imminent conditions and healthcare environment identified in the various scenarios and provide additional insight on key factors impacting the future for AH clinical education.
Subject(s)
Allied Health Occupations/education , Schools, Health Occupations/organization & administration , Accreditation , Consumer Behavior , Cooperative Behavior , Delphi Technique , Humans , Leadership , Schools, Health Occupations/economics , Schools, Health Occupations/standards , United StatesABSTRACT
ISSUE: There is limited information and consensus on the future of clinical education and the key factors impacting allied health (AH) clinical training. AH deans identified both opportunities and challenges impacting clinical education based on a proposed educational model. METHODS: From July 2013 to March 2014, 61 deans whose institutions were 2013 members of the Association of Schools of Allied Health Professions (ASAHP) participated in a three-round Delphi survey. Agreement on the relative importance of and the ability to impact the key factors was analyzed. Impact was evaluated for three groups: individual, collective, and both individual and collective deans. AH deans' responses were summarized and refined; individual items were accepted or rerated until agreement was achieved or study conclusion. RESULTS: Based on the deans' ratings of importance and impact, 159 key factors within 13 clinical education categories emerged as important for the future of clinical education. Agreement was achieved on 107 opportunities and 52 challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi technique generated new information where little existed specific to AH deans' perspectives on AH clinical education. This research supports the Key Factors Impacting Allied Health Clinical Education conceptual model proposed earlier and provides a foundation for AH deans to evaluate opportunities and challenges impacting AH clinical education and to design action plans based on this research.
Subject(s)
Administrative Personnel/psychology , Allied Health Occupations/education , Clinical Clerkship/trends , Clinical Competence/standards , Educational Technology/trends , Schools, Health Occupations/trends , Allied Health Occupations/economics , Attitude of Health Personnel , Clinical Clerkship/economics , Clinical Clerkship/standards , Delphi Technique , Educational Technology/economics , Forecasting , Humans , Schools, Health Occupations/economics , Schools, Health Occupations/standards , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Allied health (AH) clinical education provides future health professionals with the experiences necessary to develop the healthcare competencies required for success in their individual fields. There is limited information and consensus on the purposes of clinical education, including its definition and goals, and its comprehensive role in AH clinical training. This study explored whether consensus could be achieved in the definition, goals, and factors impacting AH clinical education. METHODS: An expert panel consisting of 61 AH deans (54.9% of the population) whose institutions were 2013 members of the Association of Schools of Allied Health Professions (ASAHP) participated in a three-round Delphi study. From July 2013 to March 2014, the deans expressed opinions about clinical education and its purposes. Responses were collected, summarized, and refined, and responses were accepted and re-rated until agreement was achieved or the study concluded. RESULTS: The hypothesis that AH deans would agree upon the definition and goals of clinical education was supported by this study's findings. Over 90% of deans "strongly agreed" or "agreed" on the definition of clinical education. A majority (90.2% to 92.7%) agreed with the goals. CONCLUSION: High agreement was achieved on the purposes of clinical education, resulting in a comprehensive definition of and goals for AH clinical education. The definition and goals of clinical education can be added in the healthcare literature and used in support of AH education.
