Christine Imms1, Elspeth Froude2, Eli Mang Ye Chu1,3, Loretta Sheppard1, Susan Darzins1, Stephen Guinea4, Elena Gospodarevskaya5, Rob Carter5, Mark A Symmons1, Merrolee Penman6, Kelli Nicola-Richmond7, Susan Gilbert Hunt8, Nigel Gribble9, Samantha Ashby10, Erin Mathieu11. 1. School of Allied Health, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia. 2. School of Allied Health, Australian Catholic University, North Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3. School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia. 4. Faculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia. 5. Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia. 6. Work Integrated Learning, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, Australia. 7. School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia. 8. School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 9. School of Occupational Therapy, Social Work, and Speech Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 10. School of Health Sciences (Occupational Therapy), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia. 11. Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Professional practise placements in occupational therapy education are critical to ensuring graduate competence. Australian occupational therapy accreditation standards allow up to 200 of a mandated 1000 placement hours to include simulation-based learning. There is, however, minimal evidence about the effectiveness of simulation-based placements compared to traditional placements in occupational therapy. We evaluated whether occupational therapy students completing a 40 hour (one week block) Simulated Clinical Placement (SCP) attained non-inferior learning outcomes to students attending a 40 hour Traditional Clinical Placement (TCP). METHODS: A pragmatic, non-inferiority, assessor-blinded, multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving students from six Australian universities was conducted. Statistical power analysis estimated a required sample of 425. Concealed random allocation was undertaken with a 1:1 ratio within each university. Students were assigned to SCP or TCP in one of three settings: vocational rehabilitation, mental health or physical rehabilitation. SCP materials were developed, manualised and staff training provided. TCPs were in equivalent practice areas. Outcomes were assessed using a standardised examination, unit grades, the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised and student confidence survey. A generalised estimating equation approach was used to assess non-inferiority of the SCP to the TCP. RESULTS: Of 570 randomised students (84% female), 275 attended the SCP and 265 the TCP (n = 540, 94.7% retention). There were no significant differences between the TCP and SCP on (i) examination results (marginal mean difference 1.85, 95% CI: 0.46-3.24; P = 0.087); (ii) unit score (mean (SD) SCP: 71.9 (8.8), TCP: 70.34 (9.1); P = 0.066); or (iii) placement fail rate, assessed using the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised (100% passed both groups). CONCLUSION: Students can achieve equivalent learning outcomes in a 40 hour simulated placement to those achieved in a 40 hour traditional placement. These findings provide assurance to students, educators and professional accreditation bodies that simulation can be embedded in occupational therapy education with good effect.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND/AIM: Professional practise placements in occupational therapy education are critical to ensuring graduate competence. Australian occupational therapy accreditation standards allow up to 200 of a mandated 1000 placement hours to include simulation-based learning. There is, however, minimal evidence about the effectiveness of simulation-based placements compared to traditional placements in occupational therapy. We evaluated whether occupational therapy students completing a 40 hour (one week block) Simulated Clinical Placement (SCP) attained non-inferior learning outcomes to students attending a 40 hour Traditional Clinical Placement (TCP). METHODS: A pragmatic, non-inferiority, assessor-blinded, multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving students from six Australian universities was conducted. Statistical power analysis estimated a required sample of 425. Concealed random allocation was undertaken with a 1:1 ratio within each university. Students were assigned to SCP or TCP in one of three settings: vocational rehabilitation, mental health or physical rehabilitation. SCP materials were developed, manualised and staff training provided. TCPs were in equivalent practice areas. Outcomes were assessed using a standardised examination, unit grades, the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised and student confidence survey. A generalised estimating equation approach was used to assess non-inferiority of the SCP to the TCP. RESULTS: Of 570 randomised students (84% female), 275 attended the SCP and 265 the TCP (n = 540, 94.7% retention). There were no significant differences between the TCP and SCP on (i) examination results (marginal mean difference 1.85, 95% CI: 0.46-3.24; P = 0.087); (ii) unit score (mean (SD) SCP: 71.9 (8.8), TCP: 70.34 (9.1); P = 0.066); or (iii) placement fail rate, assessed using the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised (100% passed both groups). CONCLUSION: Students can achieve equivalent learning outcomes in a 40 hour simulated placement to those achieved in a 40 hour traditional placement. These findings provide assurance to students, educators and professional accreditation bodies that simulation can be embedded in occupational therapy education with good effect.