Purpose/Hypothesis: Acute care therapists face many barriers that limit the use of screening tools including time constraints and lack of measures appropriate for use in this setting. The Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke patients (PASS) was developed to assess sitting, lying, and standing balance in persons who experienced a stroke. The StrokEDGE taskforce highly recommends the PASS for acute care, as it has excellent psychometric properties and clinical utility. This project used the PASS and the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) to assess mobility in persons with an acute stroke. The purpose of this quality improvement project was to assess the feasibility of physical therapists' use of the PASS as a screening tool to assist with discharge recommendations. Description: Data were collected during a 6-month period from the neurology floor of a 782-bed acute care hospital. Persons admitted with an acute stroke and had received a therapy evaluation were included in the cohort. The goal was to assess the PASS during the initial evaluation within 48 hours of hospital admission. Concurrent data collected during this time included mRS scores, Functional Independence Measure (FIM) transfer and ambulation scores, and therapist discharge recommendations. Results/Conclusions: One hundred fifty-three subjects, with a mean age of 64.5 ± 15.5 years, were included in this cohort. The mean PASS score was 19.7 ± 11.1, the mean mRS score was 3.7 ± 2.2, and the mean FIM scores was 2.7 ± 2.4 for transfers and 3.7 ± 1.6 for ambulation. Of the persons discharged home (N = 40), mean PASS scores were 31.8 for those recommended for home physical therapy (N = 14), 32.6 for an outpatient therapy recommendation (N = 12), and 34.9 for those requiring no therapy at discharge (N = 14). The mean PASS scores for persons with an acute rehabilitation recommendation (N = 100) was higher than those recommended for a skilled nursing facility/subacute rehabilitation (N = 13), 15.7 as compared with 9.5, respectively. Using the Pearson correlation coefficient, the PASS had a strong correlation with the FIM transfers at r = 0.90 and ambulation at r = 0.86, with a strong negative correlation to the mRS at r =−0.77 (P < .001). Clinical Relevance: Acute care therapists should consider using the PASS to help guide clinical decision making and discharge recommendations for persons hospitalized with a stroke.

Introduction. Video, phone, or in-person site visits are used to assess clinical education in entry-level physical therapy education programs. The perspectives of students and clinical instructors (CIs) related to site visits were examined in this article using 2 consecutive surveys. The first included items related to in-person and phone call site visits. The second added video calls. The research purpose was to assess the CI and student perspectives on the effectiveness of site visits and explore the differences between in-person, video, and phone visits. Review of Literature. Published literature about the effectiveness of site visits is scarce. Two recent articles explored the director of clinical education and student perspectives of site visits. Future research concentrating on the clinician perspective of site visits was recommended. Subjects. A convenience sample of 104 CIs and 97 doctor of physical therapy students were recruited by email for the 2 surveys. Methods. A mixed-methods, triangular, validating, quantitative data model was used. Respondents answered open-ended questions and rated items on 5-point Likert scales. Descriptive and chi-square statistics were calculated, and themes were developed using qualitative analysis. Results. No significant difference was found in preference of site visit method between students and CIs. CIs rated the effectiveness of site visits similarly for all methods. Students rated in-person site visits as the most effective in the first survey and video calls as the most effective in the second survey. Qualitative analysis showed that CIs and students preferred in-person visits when the student was struggling. Considering closed-ended and open-ended questions on both surveys, CIs and students would rather meet individually with the faculty member. Discussion and Conclusion. The results of this study suggest that any type of site visit can be effective; in-person visits should be considered when students are struggling, and the site visitor should meet privately with the student and CI.