While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study
IntroductionStudent clinical placements are a mandatory requirement within most accredited health programs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many health settings that had traditionally provided placements cancelled their offerings. Telehealth services however, increased and emerged as an alternative pl...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-05-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Medicine |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2023.1151980/full |
| _version_ | 1797826863796584448 |
|---|---|
| author | Rachel Bacon Sian Hopkins Ekavi Georgousopoulou Irmina Nahon Catherine Hilly CaraJane Millar Allyson Flynn Linda Smillie Sarah Chapman Nicholas Brown |
| author_facet | Rachel Bacon Sian Hopkins Ekavi Georgousopoulou Irmina Nahon Catherine Hilly CaraJane Millar Allyson Flynn Linda Smillie Sarah Chapman Nicholas Brown |
| author_sort | Rachel Bacon |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | IntroductionStudent clinical placements are a mandatory requirement within most accredited health programs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many health settings that had traditionally provided placements cancelled their offerings. Telehealth services however, increased and emerged as an alternative placement setting.AimTo compare the learning experiences for allied health students provided by telehealth and face-to-face accredited health placements.MethodsHealth students, from a university clinic between March to December 2020, delivering both face-to-face and telehealth consultations, were invited to complete a telephone survey with 3 demographic questions; and 10-items comparing their telehealth and face-to-face learning experiences. Pearson’s chi-squared/Fisher’s exact test was used to examine the association between each item and consultation setting. Qualitative survey data was thematically analysed using a descriptive approach.Results49 students from 2 universities and 5 disciplines completed the survey. Students rated their face-to-face experiences significantly higher than their telehealth experiences across all items (all p-values <0.01). Across 9 items students reported positive learning experiences in both settings. Students had greater opportunities to work in a multidisciplinary team in a face-to-face setting. Four themes were generated: (1) placements can vary in quality regardless of setting; (2) telehealth can provide valuable learning experiences and support competency development; (3) enablers for telehealth placements and (4) barriers for telehealth placements.ConclusionWhile telehealth can support student learning and competency development, in this study students preferred face-to-face experiences. To optimise telehealth placements consideration needs to be given to barriers and enablers such as technological issues and university curricula preparation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T12:39:05Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-c484316e2d6346cb940b3a191cd67cbf |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2296-858X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T12:39:05Z |
| publishDate | 2023-05-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Medicine |
| spelling | doaj.art-c484316e2d6346cb940b3a191cd67cbf2023-05-15T04:53:06ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Medicine2296-858X2023-05-011010.3389/fmed.2023.11519801151980While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods studyRachel Bacon0Sian Hopkins1Ekavi Georgousopoulou2Irmina Nahon3Catherine Hilly4CaraJane Millar5Allyson Flynn6Linda Smillie7Sarah Chapman8Nicholas Brown9Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaCollege of Health and Biomedicine, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaAllied Health Clinical Education Unit, Canberra Health Services, Garran, ACT, AustraliaFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, AustraliaIntroductionStudent clinical placements are a mandatory requirement within most accredited health programs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many health settings that had traditionally provided placements cancelled their offerings. Telehealth services however, increased and emerged as an alternative placement setting.AimTo compare the learning experiences for allied health students provided by telehealth and face-to-face accredited health placements.MethodsHealth students, from a university clinic between March to December 2020, delivering both face-to-face and telehealth consultations, were invited to complete a telephone survey with 3 demographic questions; and 10-items comparing their telehealth and face-to-face learning experiences. Pearson’s chi-squared/Fisher’s exact test was used to examine the association between each item and consultation setting. Qualitative survey data was thematically analysed using a descriptive approach.Results49 students from 2 universities and 5 disciplines completed the survey. Students rated their face-to-face experiences significantly higher than their telehealth experiences across all items (all p-values <0.01). Across 9 items students reported positive learning experiences in both settings. Students had greater opportunities to work in a multidisciplinary team in a face-to-face setting. Four themes were generated: (1) placements can vary in quality regardless of setting; (2) telehealth can provide valuable learning experiences and support competency development; (3) enablers for telehealth placements and (4) barriers for telehealth placements.ConclusionWhile telehealth can support student learning and competency development, in this study students preferred face-to-face experiences. To optimise telehealth placements consideration needs to be given to barriers and enablers such as technological issues and university curricula preparation.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2023.1151980/fullhealthtelehealthclinical educationstudent placementCOVID-19 |
| spellingShingle | Rachel Bacon Sian Hopkins Ekavi Georgousopoulou Irmina Nahon Catherine Hilly CaraJane Millar Allyson Flynn Linda Smillie Sarah Chapman Nicholas Brown While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study Frontiers in Medicine health telehealth clinical education student placement COVID-19 |
| title | While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study |
| title_full | While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study |
| title_fullStr | While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study |
| title_full_unstemmed | While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study |
| title_short | While allied health students prefer face-to-face clinical placement, telehealth can support competency development: results from a mixed-methods study |
| title_sort | while allied health students prefer face to face clinical placement telehealth can support competency development results from a mixed methods study |
| topic | health telehealth clinical education student placement COVID-19 |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2023.1151980/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rachelbacon whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT sianhopkins whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT ekavigeorgousopoulou whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT irminanahon whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT catherinehilly whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT carajanemillar whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT allysonflynn whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT lindasmillie whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT sarahchapman whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy AT nicholasbrown whilealliedhealthstudentspreferfacetofaceclinicalplacementtelehealthcansupportcompetencydevelopmentresultsfromamixedmethodsstudy |