Evaluation of chiropractic students' knowledge and attitudes following pain interventions: A randomized educational trial at 2 institutions.

IF 0.7 Q4 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Chiropractic Education Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.7899/JCE-23-22
Kristin L Miller, Patrick Boylan, Casey R Mullen, Macy L Randolph, Norman W Kettner, Katherine A Pohlman
{"title":"Evaluation of chiropractic students' knowledge and attitudes following pain interventions: A randomized educational trial at 2 institutions.","authors":"Kristin L Miller, Patrick Boylan, Casey R Mullen, Macy L Randolph, Norman W Kettner, Katherine A Pohlman","doi":"10.7899/JCE-23-22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine chiropractic students' attitudes regarding knowledge of pain neuroscience, chronic pain, and patient-centered care before and after educational interventions. Secondarily, this study aimed to compare measures of these skills between cohorts at different timepoints throughout training programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using stratified randomization, 281 Year 3 chiropractic students at 2 institutions were allocated into 1 of 3 educational interventions and served as active-control comparison groups: pain neuroscience education, chronic pain education, or patient-centered care. Participants completed validated surveys regarding their experience with the education interventions immediately pre- and post-lecture and 12 weeks after completion. For further comparison, surveys were also completed by 160 Year 1 students and 118 Year 2 students at 1 of the institutions. Independent sample t tests and 1-way analysis of variance were used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All Year 3 lecture groups showed immediate improvements (pain neuroscience education: 3.99 + 3.09/100, p = .18 [95% CI: 10.10 to -1.77]; chronic pain education: 0.42 + 0.74/7, p = .02 [95% CI: 0.72 to 0.07]; patient-centered care: 0.25 + 0.12/6, p = .05 [95% CI: 0.12-0.51]), but these were not sustained at the 12-week follow-up (pain neuroscience education: -6.25 + 4.36/100, p = .15 [95% CI: 14.93 to -2.42]; chronic pain education: 0.33 + 0.16/7, p = .19 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.01]; patient-centered care: 0.13 + 0.13/6, p = .30 [95% CI: 0.41 to -0.13]). Compared to active controls, only the patient-centered care group showed an immediate statistically significant difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While this study found that immediate improvement in targeted competencies is possible with focused interventions, they were not sustained long term.</p>","PeriodicalId":44516,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chiropractic Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chiropractic Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7899/JCE-23-22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To examine chiropractic students' attitudes regarding knowledge of pain neuroscience, chronic pain, and patient-centered care before and after educational interventions. Secondarily, this study aimed to compare measures of these skills between cohorts at different timepoints throughout training programs.

Methods: Using stratified randomization, 281 Year 3 chiropractic students at 2 institutions were allocated into 1 of 3 educational interventions and served as active-control comparison groups: pain neuroscience education, chronic pain education, or patient-centered care. Participants completed validated surveys regarding their experience with the education interventions immediately pre- and post-lecture and 12 weeks after completion. For further comparison, surveys were also completed by 160 Year 1 students and 118 Year 2 students at 1 of the institutions. Independent sample t tests and 1-way analysis of variance were used for data analysis.

Results: All Year 3 lecture groups showed immediate improvements (pain neuroscience education: 3.99 + 3.09/100, p = .18 [95% CI: 10.10 to -1.77]; chronic pain education: 0.42 + 0.74/7, p = .02 [95% CI: 0.72 to 0.07]; patient-centered care: 0.25 + 0.12/6, p = .05 [95% CI: 0.12-0.51]), but these were not sustained at the 12-week follow-up (pain neuroscience education: -6.25 + 4.36/100, p = .15 [95% CI: 14.93 to -2.42]; chronic pain education: 0.33 + 0.16/7, p = .19 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.01]; patient-centered care: 0.13 + 0.13/6, p = .30 [95% CI: 0.41 to -0.13]). Compared to active controls, only the patient-centered care group showed an immediate statistically significant difference.

Conclusions: While this study found that immediate improvement in targeted competencies is possible with focused interventions, they were not sustained long term.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对脊骨神经科学生疼痛干预后的知识和态度进行评估:两所院校的随机教育试验。
目的研究脊骨神经科学专业学生在教育干预前后对疼痛神经科学、慢性疼痛和以患者为中心的护理知识的态度。其次,本研究还旨在比较不同组别学生在整个培训计划的不同时间点对这些技能的测量结果:方法: 通过分层随机法,2所院校的281名三年级脊骨神经科学学生被分配到3个教育干预组中的1个,并作为主动对照比较组:疼痛神经科学教育、慢性疼痛教育或以患者为中心的护理。参与者在授课前、授课后以及授课结束 12 周后填写了有关教育干预体验的有效调查问卷。为了进一步比较,其中一所院校的 160 名一年级学生和 118 名二年级学生也填写了调查问卷。数据分析采用了独立样本 t 检验和单因素方差分析:结果:所有三年级授课组的教学效果都有立竿见影的改善(疼痛神经科学教育:3.99 + 3.09/1:3.99 + 3.09/100, p = .18 [95% CI: 10.10 to -1.77]; 慢性疼痛教育0.42 + 0.74/7,p = .02 [95% CI:0.72 至 0.07];以患者为中心的护理:0.25 + 0.12/6,p = .05 [95% CI:0.12-0.51]),但这些改善在 12 周的随访中并未持续(疼痛神经科学教育:-6.25 + 4.36/100,p = .15 [95% CI:14.93 至 -2.42];慢性疼痛教育:0.33 + 0.16/7,p = .02 [95% CI:0.72 至 0.07];以患者为中心的护理:0.25 + 0.12/6,p = .05 [95% CI:0.12-0.51]):慢性疼痛教育:0.33 + 0.16/7,p = .19 [95% CI:0.66 至 0.01];以患者为中心的护理:0.13 + 0.13/6,p = .30 [95% CI:0.41 至 -0.13])。与积极的对照组相比,只有以患者为中心的护理组显示出了即时的显著统计学差异:结论:虽然这项研究发现,通过集中干预可以立即提高目标能力,但这些能力并不能长期保持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Chiropractic Education
Journal of Chiropractic Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
37.50%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: The Journal of Chiropractic Education is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing research and scholarly articles pertaining to education theory, pedagogy, methodologies, practice, and other content relevant to the health professions academe. Journal contents are of interest to teachers, researchers, clinical educators, administrators, and students.
期刊最新文献
Patient satisfaction with clinical services provided by chiropractic students under supervision compared to licensed chiropractors: An observational study. Development of a new examination for the Canadian Chiropractic Examining Board. Improving diversity, equity, and inclusion in chiropractic education and profession: Report from three 2020-2021 summit meetings. Compliance with evidence-based radiographic imaging guidelines by chiropractic interns at a chiropractic training program. Comparison of mistakes on multiple-choice question and fill-in-the-blank examinations: A retrospective analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1