Mulligan Edward P, Weber Mark D, Reinking Mark F
UT Southwestern School of Health Professions, Dallas, TX, USA.
University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Dec;9(7):959-73.
Every ten years the American Board of Physical Therapy Specialties conducts a practice analysis to revalidate and revise the description of specialty practice for sports physical therapy (SPT). The primary purpose of this paper is to describe the process and results of the most recent analysis, which defines the competencies that distinguish the subspecialty practice of (SPT). Additionally, the study allowed for the comparison of responses of board certified specialists in SPT to respondents who were not specialists while reflecting on demographic changes and evolving trends since the previous analysis of this physical therapy specialty practice was conducted 10 years ago.
A survey instrument based on guidelines from the American Board of Physical Therapy Specialties was developed by the Sports Specialty Council (SSC) and a panel of subject matter experts (SME) in SPT to re-evaluate contemporary practice. The instrument was pilot tested and following revisions, was sent to 1780 physical therapists, 930 of whom were board certified specialists in SPT and 850 of whom were randomly selected members of the Sports Physical Therapy Section (SPTS) who were not board certified specialists in SPT. 414 subjects returned completed surveys for a 23% response rate. 235 of the respondents were known to be board certified sports specialists, 120 did not indicate their specialty status, and 35 were non-specialists in SPT. All were members of the SPTS of the American Physical Therapy Association. The survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Univariate comparisons were performed using parametric and nonparametric statistical tests in order to evaluate differences between specialist and non-specialist item responses.
The survey results were reviewed by the SSC and a panel of SME. Using a defined decision making process, the results were used to determine the competencies that define the specialty practice of SPT. Survey results were also used to develop the SPT specialty board examination blueprint and define the didactic curriculum required of accredited SPT residency programs. A number of significant comparisons between the specialists and non-specialists were identified.
The competency revalidation process culminated in the publication of the 4th edition of the Sports Physical Therapy Description of Specialty Practice in November of 2013. This document serves to guide the process related to the attainment and maintenance of the board certified clinical specialization in SPT. In anticipation of the continued evolution of this specialty practice, this process will be repeated every 10 years to reassess the characteristics of these providers and the factors they consider critically important and unique to the practice of SPT.
美国物理治疗专业委员会每十年进行一次实践分析，以重新验证和修订运动物理治疗（SPT）专业实践的描述。本文的主要目的是描述最近一次分析的过程和结果，该分析确定了区分运动物理治疗（SPT）亚专业实践的能力。此外，该研究还对运动物理治疗专业认证专家与非专家的回答进行了比较，同时反思了自10年前上次对该物理治疗专业实践进行分析以来的人口结构变化和发展趋势。
运动专业委员会（SSC）和一组运动物理治疗（SPT）领域的主题专家（SME）根据美国物理治疗专业委员会的指南开发了一份调查问卷，以重新评估当代实践。该问卷进行了预测试，经过修订后，发送给1780名物理治疗师，其中930名是运动物理治疗（SPT）专业认证专家，850名是从运动物理治疗分会（SPTS）中随机挑选的非运动物理治疗（SPT）专业认证成员。414名受试者返回了完整的调查问卷，回复率为23%。已知235名受访者是运动专业认证专家，120名未表明其专业身份，35名是运动物理治疗（SPT）非专家。他们均为美国物理治疗协会运动物理治疗分会（SPTS）的成员。使用描述性统计分析调查问卷的回复。为了评估专家和非专家项目回复之间的差异，使用参数和非参数统计检验进行单变量比较。
运动专业委员会（SSC）和一组主题专家（SME）对调查结果进行了审查。通过定义的决策过程，结果被用于确定定义运动物理治疗（SPT）专业实践的能力。调查结果还用于制定运动物理治疗（SPT）专业委员会考试蓝图，并确定经认可的运动物理治疗（SPT）住院医师培训项目所需的教学课程。确定了专家和非专家之间的一些显著差异。
能力重新验证过程最终促成了2013年11月《运动物理治疗专业实践描述》第4版的出版。该文件用于指导与获得和维持运动物理治疗（SPT）专业认证临床专科相关的过程。鉴于该专业实践的持续发展，此过程将每10年重复一次，以重新评估这些从业者的特征以及他们认为对运动物理治疗（SPT）实践至关重要和独特的因素。
