Bacon Rachel, Hopkins Sian, Georgousopoulou Ekavi, Nahon Irmina, Hilly Catherine, Millar CaraJane, Flynn Allyson, Smillie Linda, Chapman Sarah, Brown Nicholas
Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia.
College of Health and Biomedicine, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 May 15;10:1151980. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1151980. eCollection 2023.
Student 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.
To compare the learning experiences for allied health students provided by telehealth and face-to-face accredited health placements.
Health 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.
49 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 -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.
While 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.
在大多数经认证的健康专业课程中，学生临床实习是一项强制性要求。在新冠疫情期间，许多传统上提供实习机会的医疗机构取消了实习安排。然而，远程医疗服务有所增加，并成为一种替代实习场所。
比较远程医疗和面对面的经认证健康专业实习为健康专业学生提供的学习体验。
邀请2020年3月至12月期间在大学诊所提供面对面和远程医疗咨询服务的健康专业学生完成一项电话调查，调查包含3个人口统计学问题；以及10个项目，用于比较他们的远程医疗和面对面学习体验。使用Pearson卡方检验/费舍尔精确检验来研究每个项目与咨询方式之间的关联。采用描述性方法对定性调查数据进行主题分析。
来自2所大学5个专业的49名学生完成了调查。在所有项目中，学生对面对面体验的评分显著高于远程医疗体验（所有p值<0.01）。在9个项目中，学生报告在两种方式下都有积极的学习体验。学生在面对面环境中有更多机会在多学科团队中工作。生成了四个主题：（1）无论方式如何，实习质量可能存在差异；（2）远程医疗可以提供有价值的学习体验并支持能力发展；（3）远程医疗实习的促进因素；（4）远程医疗实习的障碍。
虽然远程医疗可以支持学生学习和能力发展，但在本研究中，学生更喜欢面对面的体验。为了优化远程医疗实习，需要考虑技术问题和大学课程准备等障碍和促进因素。
