使用电子学习方法进行物理治疗学生学习——对知识、技能、满意度和态度影响的系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 1.5 Q3 REHABILITATION European Journal of Physiotherapy Pub Date : 2022-06-17 DOI:10.1080/21679169.2022.2085789
Shabnam ShahAli, S. Shahabi, Noushin Kohan, Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani, R. Ebrahimi
{"title":"使用电子学习方法进行物理治疗学生学习——对知识、技能、满意度和态度影响的系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Shabnam ShahAli, S. Shahabi, Noushin Kohan, Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani, R. Ebrahimi","doi":"10.1080/21679169.2022.2085789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aim To assess the effectiveness of e-learning methods in comparison with traditional learning on physiotherapy students’ knowledge, skills and satisfaction/attitude. Methods Seven databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Ovid SP and Cochrane were searched until October 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared e-learning with traditional learning or another form of digital education among physiotherapy students and assessed knowledge, skills and satisfaction/attitude were included. Cochrane effective practice and organisation of care tool was used to assess risk of bias. Results Nineteen RCTs were included. The results suggested that blended learning approach is better than traditional methods for improving skills and satisfaction/attitude in physiotherapy students, with moderate to low level of evidence. There was no difference between blended learning and traditional learning for knowledge acquisition. Pure e-learning revealed an equal result with traditional learning in all measured outcomes. Due to limited number of studies that compared one e-learning method with another form of digital education, the findings were inconclusive. Conclusion e-Learning methods made changes in knowledge, skills, satisfaction/attitude. Based on moderate to low evidence, blended learning method may be more effective than traditional learning in terms of skill acquisition and satisfaction/attitude.","PeriodicalId":45694,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Physiotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using e-learning methods for physiotherapy students learning – a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact on knowledge, skills, satisfaction and attitudes\",\"authors\":\"Shabnam ShahAli, S. Shahabi, Noushin Kohan, Ismail Ebrahimi Takamjani, R. Ebrahimi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21679169.2022.2085789\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Aim To assess the effectiveness of e-learning methods in comparison with traditional learning on physiotherapy students’ knowledge, skills and satisfaction/attitude. Methods Seven databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Ovid SP and Cochrane were searched until October 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared e-learning with traditional learning or another form of digital education among physiotherapy students and assessed knowledge, skills and satisfaction/attitude were included. Cochrane effective practice and organisation of care tool was used to assess risk of bias. Results Nineteen RCTs were included. The results suggested that blended learning approach is better than traditional methods for improving skills and satisfaction/attitude in physiotherapy students, with moderate to low level of evidence. There was no difference between blended learning and traditional learning for knowledge acquisition. Pure e-learning revealed an equal result with traditional learning in all measured outcomes. Due to limited number of studies that compared one e-learning method with another form of digital education, the findings were inconclusive. Conclusion e-Learning methods made changes in knowledge, skills, satisfaction/attitude. Based on moderate to low evidence, blended learning method may be more effective than traditional learning in terms of skill acquisition and satisfaction/attitude.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21679169.2022.2085789\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21679169.2022.2085789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要目的评估电子学习方法与传统学习方法在物理治疗学生知识、技能和满意度/态度方面的有效性。方法检索PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Scopus、ProQuest、Ovid SP和Cochrane等7个数据库,直至2021年10月。随机对照试验(RCT)将物理治疗学生的电子学习与传统学习或其他形式的数字教育进行了比较,并评估了知识、技能和满意度/态度。使用Cochrane有效实践和护理组织工具来评估偏倚风险。结果纳入19项随机对照试验。研究结果表明,在提高物理治疗学生的技能和满意度/态度方面,混合学习方法优于传统方法,证据水平从中到低。混合学习和传统学习在知识获取方面没有区别。纯电子学习在所有衡量结果方面都显示出与传统学习相同的结果。由于将一种电子学习方法与另一种形式的数字教育进行比较的研究数量有限,研究结果没有结论。结论电子学习方法在知识、技能、满意度/态度等方面发生了变化。基于中低证据,混合学习方法在技能获取和满意度/态度方面可能比传统学习更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Using e-learning methods for physiotherapy students learning – a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact on knowledge, skills, satisfaction and attitudes
Abstract Aim To assess the effectiveness of e-learning methods in comparison with traditional learning on physiotherapy students’ knowledge, skills and satisfaction/attitude. Methods Seven databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Ovid SP and Cochrane were searched until October 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared e-learning with traditional learning or another form of digital education among physiotherapy students and assessed knowledge, skills and satisfaction/attitude were included. Cochrane effective practice and organisation of care tool was used to assess risk of bias. Results Nineteen RCTs were included. The results suggested that blended learning approach is better than traditional methods for improving skills and satisfaction/attitude in physiotherapy students, with moderate to low level of evidence. There was no difference between blended learning and traditional learning for knowledge acquisition. Pure e-learning revealed an equal result with traditional learning in all measured outcomes. Due to limited number of studies that compared one e-learning method with another form of digital education, the findings were inconclusive. Conclusion e-Learning methods made changes in knowledge, skills, satisfaction/attitude. Based on moderate to low evidence, blended learning method may be more effective than traditional learning in terms of skill acquisition and satisfaction/attitude.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
The meaning and feasibility of engaging in physical activity while being employed in people with mild to moderate disability due to multiple sclerosis: a qualitative study Beyond bones, joints and muscles: can physiotherapists have a role in identifying and supporting domestic violence victims? The search for clarity, effectiveness and efficiency in physiotherapy care Physical function, physical activity, and health-related quality of life among Japanese children aged 8–12 years Provoked vulvodynia from a patient perspective—physiotherapy made a difference
×
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