|
KMID : 0603920140220030037
|
|
Journal of Korean Academy of Occupational Therapy
2014 Volume.22 No. 3 p.37 ~ p.56
|
|
|
Preliminary Study of Clinical Training Standardization in Occupational Therapy
|
|
Lee Hyang-Sook
Chang Ki-Yeon
Woo Hee-Soon
Yoon Yea-Yong
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Objective : The purpose of this study is to create the basic standards for clinical training guidelines to receive aproper quality level of on-site clinical training education by investigating a system of clinical training for anationwide department of occupational therapy and clinical occupational therapists.
Methods : A survey regarding a system of clinical training was conducted in a nationwide department ofoccupational therapy and at an institution of clinical occupational therapy from August 2013 to April 2014. Basedon the job analysis data from the occupational therapists, we investigated and analyzed the preparation technique,and its importance, required for novice occupational therapists.
Results : Thirty-eight colleges and universities participated in this clinical training system survey. The averagetime of the clinical training is 517.2 hours in colleges and 983.5 hours in universities. University hospitals havethe largest number of clinical training institutions, followed by rehabilitation hospitals. In addition, disabled adultinstitutions make up 66.8% of the total number of clinical training institutions. The results of the importance in theuse of a preparation technique show that the number of items scoring higher than 4.5 points (on a 5-point scale)are 14 for the evaluation items and 2 for the intervention items based on the responses of the professorssurveyed, and 3 for the evaluation items and 2 for the intervention items based on the responses from theclinicians. In the two groups, there are significant differences in 19 of the evaluation items and 1 of theintervention items. The results of the preparation techniques of newly appointed occupational therapists show thatthe items scoring higher than 4.5 points (on a 5-point scale) are 23 for the evaluation items and 30 for theintervention items based on the responses of the professors, and 14 for the evaluation items and 25 for theintervention items based on the responses of the clinicians. In the two groups, there are significant differences in20 of the evaluation items and 8 of the intervention items.
Conclusion : This study showed significant differences in interdisciplinary training times when implementing aclinical training program. There is large difference between professors and clinicians in terms of which techniquesare important in the area of occupation therapy. The development of clinical training guidelines reflecting theopinions of both sides is needed. In addition, the development of clinical practice guidelines according to each fieldis needed because there is big difference in the important techniques used in the areas of occupational therapy.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Clinical training guideline, Clinical training standardization, Clinical training system, Occupation therapy technique
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|