QUESTION: What is the efficacy and acceptability of a peer-assisted learning model compared with a traditional model for paired students in physiotherapy clinical education? DESIGN: Prospective, assessor-blinded, randomised crossover trial. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four physiotherapy students in the third year of a 4-year undergraduate degree. INTERVENTION: Participants each completed 5 weeks of clinical placement, utilising a peer-assisted learning model (a standardised series of learning activities undertaken by student pairs and educators to facilitate peer interaction using guided strategies) and a traditional model (usual clinical supervision and learning activities led by clinical educators supervising pairs of students). OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was student performance, rated on the Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice by a blinded assessor, the supervising clinical educator and by the student in self-assessment. Secondary outcome measures were satisfaction with the teaching and learning experience measured via survey, and statistics on services delivered. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice scores as rated by the blinded assessor (p=0.43), the supervising clinical educator (p=0.94) or the students (p=0.99). In peer-assisted learning, clinical educators had an extra 6 minutes/day available for non-student-related quality activities (95% CI 1 to 10) and students received an additional 0.33 entries/day of written feedback from their educator (95% CI 0.06 to 0.61). Clinical educator satisfaction and student satisfaction were higher with the traditional model. CONCLUSION: The peer-assisted learning model trialled in the present study produced similar student performance outcomes when compared with a traditional approach. Peer-assisted learning provided some benefits to educator workload and student feedback, but both educators and students were more satisfied with the traditional model. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12610000859088. [Sevenhuysen S, Skinner EH, Farlie MK, Raitman L, Nickson W, Keating JL, Maloney S, Molloy E, Haines TP (2014) Educators and students prefer traditional clinical education to a peer-assisted learning model, despite similar student performance outcomes: a randomised trial.Journal of Physiotherapy60: 209-216].
RCT Entities:
QUESTION: What is the efficacy and acceptability of a peer-assisted learning model compared with a traditional model for paired students in physiotherapy clinical education? DESIGN: Prospective, assessor-blinded, randomised crossover trial. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four physiotherapy students in the third year of a 4-year undergraduate degree. INTERVENTION: Participants each completed 5 weeks of clinical placement, utilising a peer-assisted learning model (a standardised series of learning activities undertaken by student pairs and educators to facilitate peer interaction using guided strategies) and a traditional model (usual clinical supervision and learning activities led by clinical educators supervising pairs of students). OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was student performance, rated on the Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice by a blinded assessor, the supervising clinical educator and by the student in self-assessment. Secondary outcome measures were satisfaction with the teaching and learning experience measured via survey, and statistics on services delivered. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice scores as rated by the blinded assessor (p=0.43), the supervising clinical educator (p=0.94) or the students (p=0.99). In peer-assisted learning, clinical educators had an extra 6 minutes/day available for non-student-related quality activities (95% CI 1 to 10) and students received an additional 0.33 entries/day of written feedback from their educator (95% CI 0.06 to 0.61). Clinical educator satisfaction and student satisfaction were higher with the traditional model. CONCLUSION: The peer-assisted learning model trialled in the present study produced similar student performance outcomes when compared with a traditional approach. Peer-assisted learning provided some benefits to educator workload and student feedback, but both educators and students were more satisfied with the traditional model. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12610000859088. [Sevenhuysen S, Skinner EH, Farlie MK, Raitman L, Nickson W, Keating JL, Maloney S, Molloy E, Haines TP (2014) Educators and students prefer traditional clinical education to a peer-assisted learning model, despite similar student performance outcomes: a randomised trial.Journal of Physiotherapy60: 209-216].
Authors: Diane Dennis; Lora Cipriano; Ginny Mulvey; Stephanie Parkinson; Alan Reubenson; Anne Furness Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Mansour L Alsulmi; Muath M Alqarni; Anwar A Althaqfi; Hattan H Bosy; Ruqayya A Azher; Marwan A Sabbagh; Basem H Bahakeem; Emad M Tashkandi Journal: Saudi Med J Date: 2022-02 Impact factor: 1.422
Authors: Simon Schwill; Johanna Fahrbach-Veeser; Andreas Moeltner; Christiane Eicher; Sonia Kurczyk; David Pfisterer; Joachim Szecsenyi; Svetla Loukanova Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2020-01-16 Impact factor: 2.463