Perceptions of Polish and German physiotherapists about their professional education and development: a cross-sectional nonrandomized questionnaire cohort study

Abstract

Abstract Background The approach to the education and professional advancement of physiotherapists is particularly relevant today. To date, no studies have compared the perceptions of physiotherapists regarding professional issues in geographically close European countries such as Poland and Germany. Therefore, this study’s purpose was to compare Polish and German physiotherapists’ perceptions related to their profession, entry-level education, and career opportunities. Methods We recruited 565 physiotherapists from Poland and 560 physiotherapists from Germany. An opinion polling method based on a questionnaire was applied in the study. The survey was conducted in 48 facilities located throughout the territories of the two countries. The assessment focused on the following three issues: 1) professional education (form and content of educational programs, organizational aspects, and effects of education); 2) professional development and career opportunities; and 3) the relationship between years of service and perceptions of professional education, career satisfaction and advancement opportunities. Results German respondents rated specific aspects of their education, development opportunities and professional careers more highly than their Polish counterparts (p = 0.001). A highly significant negative correlation was identified in both groups between all the assessed aspects of professional education and years of service (0.9 ≤ |R| < 1, p = 0.001). Conclusions Opinions on their professions expressed by physiotherapists from closely neighboring countries, namely, Poland and Germany, were surprisingly disparate. Compared to their Polish colleagues, German physiotherapists viewed their experiences more favorably vis-a-vis entry-level education, career opportunities, and professional status. Further study is needed to establish whether these findings reflect actual differences, sampling bias, or other factors.