Background: This study targeted the association of program characteristics of 203 Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) programs in the United States (US) reported by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE) in their 2017 Annual Accreditation Report (AAR) with measures of core faculty research volume. The association of institutional, program, and faculty characteristics of an institution with core faculty research volume was investigated. Methods: This observational study analyzed data provided in the AAR about program research volume. Predictor variables included institutional, program and faculty characteristics. Research volume was measured as a ratio of 1) number of peer-reviewed publications, 2) National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, and 3) faculty with grants, per number of core faculty. Research volume was stratified by quartiles and analyzed using logistic regression analyses. The highest 25% were analyzed against the lowest 75%. Results: In the multivariate logistic regression analyses, research Carnegie classification was positively associated with NIH funding (OR = 4.04; 95% CI = 1.92, 8.48) and number of peer reviewed publications (OR = 7.63; 95% CI = 3.39, 17.14). Square footage of research space was positively associated with number of peer reviewed publications (OR = 4.58; 95% CI = 2.08, 10.11). Private status was negatively associated with NIH funding (OR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.17, 0.83) and faculty holding grants (OR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.19, 0.76). Conclusions: There is strong evidence that research culture (e.g., research Carnegie status and dedicated research space) is related to research productivity in DPT programs in the US. Private status was indicative of a non-research intensive environment, which may be reflective of a current trend of small, non-research based private institutions initiating DPT programs.
Background Individuals with hemiparesis following stroke often experience a decline in the paretic limb’s anteriorly directed ground reaction force during walking (i.e., limb propulsive force). Gait speed and walking capacity have been independently associated with paretic limb propulsion, quality of life, and participation in people with stroke. However, it is unclear as to the extent that underlying limb mechanics (i.e., propulsion) play in influencing perceptions of quality of life and participation. We therefore sought to determine the role of limb propulsion during gait on the perception of quality of life and participation in people following stroke. Methods This study is a secondary analysis of individuals involved in a gait retraining randomized control trial. Gait speed, walking capacity, limb propulsion, Stroke Impact Scale, and average daily step counts were assessed prior to and following 6 weeks of training. The pre-training data from 40 individuals were analyzed cross-sectionally using Pearson and Spearman correlations, to evaluate the potential relationship between limb propulsion (ratio of paretic limb propulsion to total propulsion) with gait speed, gait capacity, perceived quality of life domains, and average daily step counts. Partial correlations were used to control for gait speed. Thirty-one individuals were assessed longitudinally for the same relationships. Results We observed a training effect for gait speed, walking capacity, and some quality of life measures. However, after controlling for gait speed, we observed no significant (p≤0.05) correlations in the cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Significance After controlling for the influence of gait speed, paretic limb propulsion is not directly related to perceived quality of life or participation. Although limb propulsion may not have a direct effect on participant’s perceived quality of life, it appears to be an important factor to enhance gait performance, and therefore may be important to target in rehabilitation, when feasible.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.