Kathleen E Norman1, Mary Jane O'Donovan1, Fiona Campbell2. 1. School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston. 2. Quality Management, College of Physiotherapists of Ontario, Toronto, Ont.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario (CPO) developed its peer practice assessment (PA) process under statutory requirements for quality assurance. Each year, a small percentage of physiotherapists, most selected at random, undergo PA. To shed light on continuing competence, we report outcomes from physiotherapists who have had two PAs. METHODS: Records were extracted for physiotherapists with two unrelated PAs. Demographic features, peer assessors' scores, and consequent outcome decisions were examined. Outcomes were examined cross-sectionally (vs. other PAs in the same time period) and longitudinally (within cohort). RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2012, 117 Ontario physiotherapists underwent two unrelated PAs, typically 5-7 years apart. This cohort was representative of Ontario physiotherapists in terms of sex ratios, education, and years in practice. At the first PA (PA1), this cohort's outcomes were similar to those of other physiotherapists; at the second PA (PA2), they were better than others undergoing PA1 in the same period (p=0.02). The cohort's outcomes were better at PA2 than at PA1 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Physiotherapists are likely to meet professional standards in a repeat PA 5-7 years after an initial one. Additional research is required to identify risk factors for not meeting standards. The findings provide empirical evidence to guide ongoing development of the CPO's quality management program.
PURPOSE: The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario (CPO) developed its peer practice assessment (PA) process under statutory requirements for quality assurance. Each year, a small percentage of physiotherapists, most selected at random, undergo PA. To shed light on continuing competence, we report outcomes from physiotherapists who have had two PAs. METHODS: Records were extracted for physiotherapists with two unrelated PAs. Demographic features, peer assessors' scores, and consequent outcome decisions were examined. Outcomes were examined cross-sectionally (vs. other PAs in the same time period) and longitudinally (within cohort). RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2012, 117 Ontario physiotherapists underwent two unrelated PAs, typically 5-7 years apart. This cohort was representative of Ontario physiotherapists in terms of sex ratios, education, and years in practice. At the first PA (PA1), this cohort's outcomes were similar to those of other physiotherapists; at the second PA (PA2), they were better than others undergoing PA1 in the same period (p=0.02). The cohort's outcomes were better at PA2 than at PA1 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Physiotherapists are likely to meet professional standards in a repeat PA 5-7 years after an initial one. Additional research is required to identify risk factors for not meeting standards. The findings provide empirical evidence to guide ongoing development of the CPO's quality management program.
Entities:
Keywords:
clinical competence; peer review; program evaluation; quality improvement