Benchmarking in Academic Physical Therapy: A Multicenter Trial Using the PT-GQ Survey

Author:

Shields Richard K1,Ambler Steven B,Audette Jennifer,Austin Gary P,Berg-Poppe Patti,Bowden Mark G,Buford John A,Chevan Julia,Christensen Nicole,Krasinski Debra Clayton,Costello Ellen,Decker Ann Marie,Dupre Anne-Marie,Ellis Terry D,Frank Lynn,Fulk George D,Gagnon Kendra,Galen Sujay Saphire,Healey William E,Irrgang James J,Kirk-Sanchez Neva,Mahoney Edward C,Maňago Marc M,Michael McKeough D,Merians Alma S,Miller Amy H,Nesbit Kathryn C,North Sara E,Pabian Patrick S,Peck Kirk,Silkwood-Sherer Debbie,Talley Susan Ann,van Duijn Arie J,Scott Ward R,Dudley-Javoroski Shauna1,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, 1-252 Medical Education Building, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective Academic physical therapy has no universal metrics by which educational programs can measure outcomes, limiting their ability to benchmark to their own historical performance, to peer institutions, or to other health care professions. The PT-Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) survey, adapted from the Association of American Medical Colleges’ GQ, addresses this gap by offering both inter-professional insight and fine-scale assessment of physical therapist education. This study reports the first wave of findings from an ongoing multi-site trial of the PT-GQ among diverse academic physical therapy programs, including (1) benchmarks for academic physical therapy, and (2) a comparison of the physical therapist student experience to medical education benchmarks. Methods Thirty-four doctor of physical therapy (DPT) programs (13.2% nationwide sample) administered the online survey to DPT graduates during the 2019 to 2020 academic year. PT-GQ and Association of American Medical Colleges data were contrasted via Welch’s unequal-variance t test and Hedges g (effect size). Results A total of 1025 respondents participated in the study (response rate: 63.9%). The average survey duration was 31.8 minutes. Overall educational satisfaction was comparable with medicine, and respondents identified areas of curricular strength (eg, anatomy) and weakness (eg, pharmacology). DPT respondents provided higher ratings of faculty professionalism than medicine, lower rates of student mistreatment, and a lesser impact of within-program diversity on their training. One-third of respondents were less than “satisfied” with student mental health services. DPT respondents reported significantly higher exhaustion but lower disengagement than medical students, along with lower tolerance for ambiguity. Of DPT respondents who reported educational debt, one-third reported debt exceeding $150,000, the threshold above which the DPT degree loses economic power. Conclusions These academic benchmarks, using the PT-GQ, provided insight into physical therapist education and identified differences between physical therapist and medical student perceptions. Impact This ongoing trial will establish a comprehensive set of benchmarks to better understand academic physical therapy outcomes.

Funder

APTA Academy of Education

Clinical and Educational Pilot Grant

University of Iowa Health Care

Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3