Based on indicators that emerged from The First Physical Therapy Summit on Global Health (2007), the Second Summit (2011) identified themes to inform a global physical therapy action plan to integrate health promotion into practice across the World Confederation for Physical Therapy (WCPT) regions. Working questions were: (1) how well is health promotion implemented within physical therapy practice; and (2) how might this be improved across five target audiences (i.e. physical therapist practitioners, educators, researchers, professional body representatives, and government liaisons/consultants). In structured facilitated sessions, Summit representatives (n ¼ 32) discussed: (1) within WCPT regions, what is working and the challenges; and (2) across WCPT regions, what are potential directions using World Cafe´T M methodology. Commonalities outweighed differences with respect to strategies to advance health-focused physical therapy as a clinical competency across regions and within target audiences. Participants agreed that health-focused practice is a professional priority, and a strategic action plan was needed to develop it as a clinical competency. The action plan and recommendations largely paralleled the principles and objectives of the World Health Organization's non-communicable diseases action plan. A third Summit planned for 2015 will provide a mechanism for follow-up to evaluate progress in integrating health-focused physical therapy within the profession.

Traditional predictors of medical school performance, such as Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) scores and grade point averages, are often used during the admissions process to help identify the prospective students who are most likely to complete the basic science portion of the curriculum successfully. Here we analyzed the admissions files and student records of 285 first-year medical students who matriculated at the University of California at Davis School of Medicine between 1999 and 2001 to determine if performance in medical gross anatomy is a similar, if not better, predictor of performance on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 than traditional predictors used by medical school admissions committees. Though MCAT scores and grade point averages were correlated with scores on the USMLE Step 1, only the score on the biological science section of the MCAT was significantly correlated with passing the licensing examination. In contrast, class rank in medical gross anatomy and the score on a gross anatomy comprehensive final examination were correlated both with scores on the USMLE Step 1 and passing the examination. Our results indicate that medical schools should consider performance in medical gross anatomy just as much, if not more, than traditional predictors of medical school performance when trying to identify students who may need more time or tutoring to pass the licensing examination.

The performance of students taking medical gross anatomy at the University of California at Davis during a 4-year period (1999-2002) was correlated with prior undergraduate anatomy coursework. Significant correlations were observed between class rank in medical anatomy and taking any undergraduate anatomy as well as the total number of undergraduate anatomy units (P<0.01). Taking human gross anatomy and an anatomy laboratory course were significantly correlated with medical anatomy class rank (P<0.01) as were grades in human anatomy, comparative vertebrate anatomy and anatomy laboratory courses (P<0.05). The medical anatomy course offered in 1999-2000 was 172 hr long, and the course offered in 2001-2002 was 135 hr long, with most of the difference made by decreasing lecture time while sparing the dissection laboratory. The reduction in course length was the consequence of a curriculum-wide cap in weekly contact hours. In the 172-hr medical anatomy course there were significant correlations between the students who took undergraduate anatomy and both class rank and the score on the final examination (P<0.01). These correlations did not exist for the 135-hr course. This may be explained by previous anatomy experiences helping students learn from lecture more than from dissection laboratory, as well as the extra study time available to students in the reformed medical curriculum. Pre-medical students and health science advisors need to consider that the benefits of taking anatomy as an undergraduate may be dependent on the configuration of a medical school's curriculum.

No abstract

No abstract