The Use of Videoconferencing for Clinical Site Evaluations

Introduction. Best practice in clinical education (CE) includes the formation of strong relationships through collaborative communication among all stakeholders. Directors of Clinical Education (DCEs) may establish this through a site visit (SV) during student CE experiences (CEEs) but several barriers to conducting SVs have been identified, including scheduling of visits, time, and cost. There is sparse literature describing the DCEs most preferred method of communication when conducting SVs. This study explored whether DCEs perceive SVs as important, their preferred method of communication used to conduct these SVs, and the reasons underlying these preferences. Methods. A survey of both scaled and open-ended questions was sent to 300 DCEs/assistant DCEs from Commission on Accreditations in Physical Therapy Education accredited Physical Therapy programs. The response rate was 41%. Results. Statistical analysis showed DCE preference for in-person SVs over other forms of communication while also rating them as “very effective.” Directors of Clinical Education indicated that the primary purposes of an SV are to nurture academic–clinical relationships and to exchange information. In-person SVs offer a more complete picture of the CEE and allow the DCE to observe non-verbal cues that are not afforded by other types of communication. The recent pandemic has caused a shift to an increased use of videoconferencing for SVs. The DCEs acknowledged that there is no “one size fits all” approach to the SV process. Discussion and Conclusion. Similar to students, DCEs prefer and value in-person communication for SVs but are mindful that clinician preferences warrant a degree of flexibility in communication methods and the structure of the SV. Videoconferencing may be an alternative during circumstances when an in-person SV is not possible. Future research in this area should explore the clinician perspective.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Site Visits: Exploring the Perspectives of the Director of Clinical Education

Greco

Hochman

Jung

et al. 2021

“…Researchers have reported that virtual site visits in physician, pharmacy, and nurse practitioner programs were cost-effective, time-efficient, and provided the information needed to perform an assessment. 11,16,17 Given that most respondents in both surveys found site visits by any method effective, DCEs should consider whether the increased time and expense of an in-person visit is necessary.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Effectiveness of Physical Therapy Clinical Education Site Visits: Clinical Instructor and Student Perspectives

Lewis

Lesser

Folkins

2023

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.

“…2 Future SVs may likely continue this trend because VC is cost-effective, convenient, and a good alternative when in person SVs are not possible. 1,2,7,[10][11][12] e authors foresee a combination of various communication methods used in the future. Flexibility in conducting SVs may offer options to CIs with limited time and space for in-person SVs.…”

Section: A Team Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although SVs are perceived as valuable to physical therapist students, 1 DCEs, 2 and others in health science professions, [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] several barriers limit conducting SVs, particularly those conducted in person. 7,[10][11][12][13] Currently, no guidelines exist for prioritizing in-person SVs from all stakeholders' perspectives involved in clinical education. Because the DCE is primarily responsible for coordinating, scheduling, and conducting most SVs, it is incumbent to understand the SV process from their perspective, as well as how to best balance the barriers and benefits of conducting SVs to cultivate best practice in clinical education.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The “How” and “Why” Behind Clinical Site Visits: A Qualitative Study Exploring Director of Clinical Education Perspectives

Greco,

Hochman,

Silberman

2023

Introduction. Several studies have investigated stakeholder perspectives regarding clinical site visits (SVs). An SV is one of the many ways of building strong relationships through collaborative communication. This study explored perceptions of directors of clinical education (DCEs) about why SVs are important, why they prefer certain methods of communication over others, and how they prioritize their decision-making process regarding structure and communication methods used. Literature Review. Barriers to conducting SVs exist, including scheduling challenges, time, and cost. Some studies suggest preferences for using in-person communication. Subjects. Fifteen DCEs from across the United States. Methods. Subjects participated in one-on-one semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using a grounded theory approach and thematic analysis. Results. Six themes emerged from the data: (1) communication is vital, (2) SVs are fact-finding missions that serve multiple purposes, (3) flexibility is essential, (4) showing up in person has a strong impact, (5) DCEs strategically schedule in-person SVs, and (6) faculty assistance can be valuable. Some of the purposes of an SV include learning about the clinic's expectations, gathering data to ensure that the student is having a good experience, keeping current with curricular trends and contemporary practice, and building and nurturing relationships. Faculty may be able to assist in conducting SVs when properly trained. In-person SVs show a powerful message of support to students and clinicians. Discussion and conclusion. Similar to other stakeholders, DCEs value SVs for building, maintaining, and strengthening clinical and academic relationships. Site visits also bridge curricular gaps, support stakeholders, and help DCEs do their job. Directors of clinical education are strategic when considering SV structure, communication methods, and prioritizing student and clinician needs. Results were used in conjunction with prior findings of our mixed-methods explanatory sequential study to create recommendations, which will empower DCEs to advocate for resources to continue conducting SVs, particularly in-person SVs, especially under certain circumstances. Future research should explore clinician perspectives, specifically related to preferred communication methods, structure of the SV, and meeting with faculty other than the DCE.