BACKGROUND: Continuing education is intended to facilitate clinicians' skills and knowledge in areas of practice, such as administration and interpretation of outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term effect of continuing education on prosthetists' confidence in administering outcome measures and their perceptions of outcomes measurement in clinical practice. DESIGN: Pretest-posttest survey methods. METHODS: A total of 66 prosthetists were surveyed before, immediately after, and 2 years after outcomes measurement education and training. Prosthetists were grouped as routine or non-routine outcome measures users, based on experience reported prior to training. RESULTS: On average, prosthetists were just as confident administering measures 1-2 years after continuing education as they were immediately after continuing education. In all, 20% of prosthetists, initially classified as non-routine users, were subsequently classified as routine users at follow-up. Routine and non-routine users' opinions differed on whether outcome measures contributed to efficient patient evaluations (79.3% and 32.4%, respectively). Both routine and non-routine users reported challenges integrating outcome measures into normal clinical routines (20.7% and 45.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Continuing education had a long-term impact on prosthetists' confidence in administering outcome measures and may influence their clinical practices. However, remaining barriers to using standardized measures need to be addressed to keep practitioners current with evolving practice expectations. Clinical relevance Continuing education (CE) had a significant long-term impact on prosthetists' confidence in administering outcome measures and influenced their clinical practices. In all, approximately 20% of prosthetists, who previously were non-routine outcome measure users, became routine users after CE. There remains a need to develop strategies to integrate outcome measurement into routine clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Continuing education is intended to facilitate clinicians' skills and knowledge in areas of practice, such as administration and interpretation of outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term effect of continuing education on prosthetists' confidence in administering outcome measures and their perceptions of outcomes measurement in clinical practice. DESIGN: Pretest-posttest survey methods. METHODS: A total of 66 prosthetists were surveyed before, immediately after, and 2 years after outcomes measurement education and training. Prosthetists were grouped as routine or non-routine outcome measures users, based on experience reported prior to training. RESULTS: On average, prosthetists were just as confident administering measures 1-2 years after continuing education as they were immediately after continuing education. In all, 20% of prosthetists, initially classified as non-routine users, were subsequently classified as routine users at follow-up. Routine and non-routine users' opinions differed on whether outcome measures contributed to efficient patient evaluations (79.3% and 32.4%, respectively). Both routine and non-routine users reported challenges integrating outcome measures into normal clinical routines (20.7% and 45.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Continuing education had a long-term impact on prosthetists' confidence in administering outcome measures and may influence their clinical practices. However, remaining barriers to using standardized measures need to be addressed to keep practitioners current with evolving practice expectations. Clinical relevance Continuing education (CE) had a significant long-term impact on prosthetists' confidence in administering outcome measures and influenced their clinical practices. In all, approximately 20% of prosthetists, who previously were non-routine outcome measure users, became routine users after CE. There remains a need to develop strategies to integrate outcome measurement into routine clinical practice.
Entities:
Keywords:
Allied health occupations; attitudes; education; follow-up studies; health knowledge; practice; professional education; prosthetics; qualitative methods; study design; surveys and questionnaires
Authors: David W Price; Elaine K Miller; Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Nancy E Brace; R Sam Larson Journal: J Contin Educ Health Prof Date: 2010 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Spyridon S Marinopoulos; Todd Dorman; Neda Ratanawongsa; Lisa M Wilson; Bimal H Ashar; Jeffrey L Magaziner; Redonda G Miller; Patricia A Thomas; Gregory P Prokopowicz; Rehan Qayyum; Eric B Bass Journal: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) Date: 2007-01
Authors: Kirsten Potter; Evan T Cohen; Diane D Allen; Susan E Bennett; Kathi G Brandfass; Gail L Widener; Amy M Yorke Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2013-12-20
Authors: Allen W Heinemann; Lauri Connelly; Linda Ehrlich-Jones; Stefania Fatone Journal: Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 1.784
Authors: Roland P S Van Peppen; Francois J F Maissan; Frank R Van Genderen; Rob Van Dolder; Nico L U Van Meeteren Journal: Physiother Res Int Date: 2008-12
Authors: Brian J Hafner; Ignacio A Gaunaurd; Sara J Morgan; Dagmar Amtmann; Rana Salem; Robert S Gailey Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Sara J Morgan; Kimberly Rowe; Chantelle C Fitting; Ignacio A Gaunaurd; Anat Kristal; Geoffrey S Balkman; Rana Salem; Alyssa M Bamer; Brian J Hafner Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 4.060