mdh.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Criterion scores, construct validity and reliability of a web-based instrument to assess physiotherapists' clinical reasoning focused on behaviour change: 'Reasoning 4 Change'
Mälardalens högskola, Akademin för hälsa, vård och välfärd, Hälsa och välfärd. (BEME)ORCID-id: 0000-0001-5356-916X
(BeME-Health)ORCID-id: 0000-0002-8865-6818
Mälardalens högskola, Akademin för hälsa, vård och välfärd, Hälsa och välfärd. Dept Phys Therapy, Vancouver, BC, Canada..
Uppsala Univ, Dept Informat Technol, Uppsala, Sweden..
Vise andre og tillknytning
2018 (engelsk)Inngår i: AIMS PUBLIC HEALTH, ISSN 2327-8994, Vol. 5, nr 3, s. 235-259Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Background and aim: 'Reasoning 4 Change' (R4C) is a newly developed instrument, including four domains (D1-D4), to assess clinical practitioners' and students' clinical reasoning with a focus on clients' behaviour change in a physiotherapy context. To establish its use in education and research, its psychometric properties needed to be evaluated. The aim of the study was to generate criterion scores and evaluate the reliability and construct validity of a web-based version of the R4C instrument. Methods: Fourteen physiotherapy experts and 39 final-year physiotherapy students completed the R4C instrument and the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT). Twelve experts and 17 students completed the R4C instrument on a second occasion. The R4C instrument was evaluated with regard to: internal consistency (five subscales of D1); test-retest reliability (D1-D4); inter-rater reliability (D2-D4); and construct validity in terms of convergent validity (D1.4, D2, D4). Criterion scores were generated based on the experts' responses to identify the scores of qualified practitioners' clinical reasoning abilities. Results: For the expert and student samples, the analyses demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency (alpha range: 0.67-0.91), satisfactory test-retest reliability (ICC range: 0.46-0.94) except for D3 for the experts and D4 for the students. The inter-rater reliability demonstrated excellent agreement within the expert group (ICC range: 0.94-1.0). The correlations between the R4C instrument and PABS-PT (r range: 0.06-0.76) supported acceptable construct validity. Conclusions: The web-based R4C instrument shows satisfactory psychometric properties and could be useful in education and research. The use of the instrument may contribute to a deeper understanding of physiotherapists' and students' clinical reasoning, valuable for curriculum development and improvements of competencies in clinical reasoning related to clients' behavioural change.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
AMER INST MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES-AIMS , 2018. Vol. 5, nr 3, s. 235-259
Emneord [en]
assessment, behaviour change, clinical reasoning, education, physiotherapy, psychometrics, reliability, validity, web application
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
fysioterapi
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-40738DOI: 10.3934/publichealth.2018.3.235ISI: 000442478900004PubMedID: 30280115OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-40738DiVA, id: diva2:1246056
Tilgjengelig fra: 2018-09-06 Laget: 2018-09-06 Sist oppdatert: 2019-11-12bibliografisk kontrollert
Inngår i avhandling
1. Clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behaviour change in physiotherapy: Development and evaluation of the Reasoning 4 Change instrument
Åpne denne publikasjonen i ny fane eller vindu >>Clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behaviour change in physiotherapy: Development and evaluation of the Reasoning 4 Change instrument
2019 (engelsk)Doktoravhandling, med artikler (Annet vitenskapelig)
Abstract [en]

With the recognition of the impact of lifestyle behaviours on health and the evidence of incorporating behavioural considerations in physiotherapy, there is a need to advance the clinical reasoning of physiotherapists. Clinical reasoning encompasses the thinking and decision-making processes guiding client management and is a core competency of physiotherapists. Enabling clinical reasoning advancements requires investigations in practice and education, which in turn require robust assessments. The overall aim of this thesis was to develop and evaluate an instrument to study physiotherapy students’ clinical reasoning focused on clients’ activity-related behaviour and behaviour change.

In study I, a conceptual model was developed based on exploration of existing research, theory and views of physiotherapists and students. The data resulted in the clinical reasoning model focused on clients’ behaviour change with reference to physiotherapists (CRBC-PT). Studies II and III included instrument development and evaluation in four phases. Phase 1 included determination of the instrument structure and item generation based on the CRBC-PT model, evidence in clinical reasoning assessment and existing measures. Phase 2 included cognitive interviews with students to assess item understanding and resulted in revisions of item problems and approval of feasibility. Phase 3 included a Delphi study with physiotherapists with expertise in behavioural medicine to evaluate item relevance. The findings demonstrated a high level of consensus regarding content relevance. The final version of the Reasoning 4 Change (R4C) instrument included four domains, namely, Physiotherapist, Input from client, Functional behavioural analysis, and Strategies for behaviour change. In phase 4, the reliability and validity of the instrument were evaluated. Physiotherapists with expertise in behavioural medicine and students responded to the web-based R4C instrument and the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists. The analyses showed excellent inter-rater reliability, satisfactory construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability. In study IV, final-semester students (n=151) from all physiotherapy programmes in Sweden completed the R4C instrument. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted with three dependent variables, namely, input from client, functional behavioural analysis, and strategies for behaviour change. All included independent variables explained 37% of the variance in input from client. Cognitive and metacognitive skills explained 22%, attitudes 15% and curriculum with behavioural medicine competencies 3%. Only the variable curriculum with behavioural medicine competencies explained the variance in functional behavioural analysis (4%) and strategies for behaviour change (5%).

In conclusion, the in-depth description of clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behaviour change may contribute to expanded understanding of the complexity and multidimensionality in reasoning processes that incorporate factors related to human behaviours, analyses of what factors motivate or hinder behaviours, and interventions to support behaviour change. Such knowledge is valuable for the teaching of and learning clinical reasoning. The R4C instrument helps fill the need for well-tested instruments and can support investigations and evaluations in physiotherapy education and research. To develop students’ clinical reasoning competence, cognitive and metacognitive skills, positive attitudes and the incorporation of behavioural medicine competencies into physiotherapy curricula should be targeted. Further attention to complex reasoning, including analysis and intervention, is warranted.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Västerås: Mälardalen University, 2019. s. 101
Serie
Mälardalen University Press Dissertations, ISSN 1651-4238 ; 289
Emneord
Assessment, Behaviour change, Clinical reasoning, Education, Functional behavioural analysis, Physiotherapy, Reliability, Scale development, Validity
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
fysioterapi
Identifikatorer
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-42931 (URN)978-91-7485-426-8 (ISBN)
Disputas
2019-05-24, Beta, Mälardalens högskola, Västerås, 09:30 (svensk)
Opponent
Veileder
Tilgjengelig fra: 2019-03-19 Laget: 2019-03-18 Sist oppdatert: 2019-11-12bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

fulltext(727 kB)76 nedlastinger
Filinformasjon
Fil FULLTEXT01.pdfFilstørrelse 727 kBChecksum SHA-512
8e7cd882cc91e0efe743fc910ff8b12bb28910c3b56acd01d2e09bbf4d58a3db2f418134036a029c24028c692fb002c930897fc248bc41c80f5479b4d0984513
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstPubMedhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6141557/

Personposter BETA

Elvén, MariaHochwälder, JacekDean, ElizabethSöderlund, Anne

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Elvén, MariaHochwälder, JacekDean, ElizabethSöderlund, Anne
Av organisasjonen

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Totalt: 76 nedlastinger
Antall nedlastinger er summen av alle nedlastinger av alle fulltekster. Det kan for eksempel være tidligere versjoner som er ikke lenger tilgjengelige

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 93 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf