No abstract

Context: Anecdotal information has been shared for several years that employers do not feel that new athletic training graduates are ready for the workforce. To date there have been no studies of employers and employees to determine deficiencies in order to confirm or refute this position. Objective: To explore the opinions of employers and employees (recent graduates within the last 3–5 years) about the level of preparation and readiness for the work force of new athletic training graduates. Specifically, the purpose was to examine the themes emerging from interviews with employers and employees about the employee's abilities. Design and Setting: A mixed methods quantitative/qualitative design involving in-depth focus group interviews. Interviews were conducted in a controlled environment during the National Athletic Trainers' Association Annual Symposium in June of 2010. Participants: Eleven employers and five employees were available at scheduled times during the symposium. Extensive networking efforts were conducted to solicit participants from 3 work settings; college/university, high school/clinic/outreach, and emerging practices. Data Collection and Analysis: Focus group interviews were videotaped then transcribed verbatim and analyzed deductively. Peer debriefing and member checks were used to ensure trustworthiness. Results: Several ‘thematic’ deficiencies, or abilities, that were lacking emerged from our analysis. Both groups cited: 1) interpersonal communication, 2) decision making/independence, 3) initiative, 4) confidence, and 5) humility/ability to learn from mistakes as abilities that were deficient in new graduates. Administrative skills was the only thematic deficiency cited by the employees but not the employers. Conclusion: Limitations of current curriculum education models and employer-driven on-the-job-orientation and experience were identified as areas of concern.

This phase III, investigator-blind, randomized, parallel-group study compared the efficacy and tolerability of clarithromycin modified release (MR) with those of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in 250 adult outpatients with acute exacerbationof chronic bronchitis (AECB). Patients received either clarithromycin MR 500 mg once daily or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 500 mg/125 mg three times daily for 7 days. Primary endpoints were sponsor-defined clinical response and pathogen outcome at the end of treatment. Secondary endpoints were sponsor-defined clinical response and pathogen outcome at study end, investigator-defined clinical response at end of treatment and end of study, resolution or improvement of signs and symptoms, eradication of baseline pathogens, serologic outcome for atypical pathogens, and occurrence of reinfection and superinfection. Adverse events and compliance were also evaluated. Clinical and bacteriologic outcomes with both treatments for all endpoints were statistically equivalent, as were total adverse events, although the incidences of digestive disturbances (13% vs 4%) and discontinuations due to adverse events (8 vs 2 patients; P < or =.05) were significantly higher with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. Ninety-five percent of patients receiving clarithromycin MR and 80% receiving amoxicillin/clavulanic acid were 100% compliant with medication (P < or =.05). Clarithromycin MR and amoxicillin/clavulanic acid are both well tolerated and effective as therapy for AECB; however, clarithromycin produced fewer side effects and discontinuations and higher compliance rates.

The diclofenac epolamine topical patch 1.3% was designed to deliver analgesic concentrations of diclofenac to an underlying soft tissue injury site, while limiting systemic exposure to diclofenac. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the diclofenac epolamine topical patch for the treatment of acute pain due to minor soft tissue injury. Patients (18-65 years, inclusive) with clinically significant minor soft tissue injuries (mild or moderate sprain, strain, or contusion) incurred within 7 days of study entry and having pain scores ≥ 5 on a Visual Analog Scale of 0-10 were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive the diclofenac epolamine topical patch (n=207) or placebo patch (n=211) application twice daily for 14 days or until pain resolution. Patients recorded pain scores every 12 h at the time of patch removal using the Visual Analog Scale. Investigator-assessed global response to therapy was also evaluated. Safety data were collected throughout the study. Twice-daily treatment with diclofenac epolamine topical patch produced a statistically significant reduction in mean pain score relative to baseline by an additional 18.2% in the diclofenac epolamine topical patch group (0.435 ± 0.268) compared with the placebo group (0.532 ± 0.293) (p=0.002; overall) beginning after application of the second patch. Consistent with this treatment effect, median time to pain resolution was shortened by 2 days in the diclofenac epolamine topical patch group relative to the placebo group (p=0.007). These results were reinforced independently by investigators who reported treatment as good or excellent for 58% of diclofenac epolamine topical patch-treated patients compared with 49% in the placebo patch group (p=0.008). The most common adverse events were treatment site related (n=16, 7.9% diclofenac epolamine topical patch; n=12, 5.8% placebo patch). Most (80%) patients reported tolerability as excellent or good. In conclusion, the diclofenac epolamine topical patch provides effective, rapid pain relief for the treatment of acute pain from minor soft tissue injury and appears generally safe and well tolerated.

Objective: To establish the validity and reliability of an online assessment instrument's items developed to track educational outcomes over time. Design and Setting: A descriptive study of the validation arguments and reliability testing of the assessment items. The instrument is available to graduating students enrolled in entry-level Athletic Training Education Programs (ATEPs). Methods: Validity was established with the creation of a national advisory board of Athletic Training educators. Construct validity was established with the creation of a test blueprint to guide the development of items for the knowledge exam. Internal reliability estimates for each domain were calculated. A single scale reliability analysis was conducted using all items. An item analysis was conducted by calculating difficulty and discrimination indexes for each item. Results: The internal reliability estimates ranged from .23 to .44 suggesting that individual domain scores for this draft of the instrument were not reliable. The single scale total score reliability however, produced an alpha = .84 suggesting a high level of reliability. Difficulty index scores ranged from .03 to .99 (mean = .74 ± .25). Discrimination index scores ranged from −.01 to .41 (mean = .21 ± .09). Conclusions: While the individual domain reliability was low, the overall single scale score is acceptable. Difficulty and discrimination index scores allowed the removal and revision of items to increase the overall reliability of the test bank.

Objective: To explore the effect of an intentional Peer-Assisted Learning (PAL) program on peer-tutors and peer-tutees for performance on specific psychomotor skills. Design and Setting: Randomized, pretest-posttest experimental design. Participants: Undergraduate students (N = 69, 42 females and 27 males, all participants were 18 to 22 years old, 19.5±1.2) enrolled in the professional phase of an accredited Athletic Training Education Program. Measurements: Pretest and posttest performance for the peer-tutors and post-peer interaction for the peer-tutees on identified therapeutic modality and orthopedic assessment psychomotor skill sets. Peer-tutors were randomly assigned to one of four groups; PAL only (PAL), PAL and the focused review session (PAL+), focused review session only (REV), and a control group (CON). Peer-tutees were randomly assigned to interact with the peer-tutors from the PAL and PAL+ or no interaction as a control group. Pretest-posttest percentage correct average changes for the peer tutors were analyzed with an ANOVA. Results: The pretest-posttest skill scores were found to be significantly different for the peer-tutors (F3,102 = 4.703; P = .004). Post-hoc means comparison revealed significant differences between the peer-tutor groups PAL versus CON, PAL+ versus CON, and REV versus CON. Analysis of the peer-tutee means revealed no significant differences (PAL; .906 ± .087, PAL+; .918 ± .077, and Control; .881 ± .061). Conclusion: These data suggest that peer interaction can increase student skill performance scores for the peer-tutors. A visual review of the means indicates a trend of increased skill level for the peer-tutees that received peer-tutoring from the PAL+ peer tutors. No significant difference was found with the REV group. It would appear from the peer-tutor perspective that a focused review session has more of an effect on student learning than peer interaction.

Context: Measurements of the opinions of alumni and employers are utilized by many athletic training education programs (ATEPs). Information obtained from such measurements can be useful in determining the strengths and weaknesses of a program. Objective: To describe the development of two instruments designed to elicit the opinions of recent athletic training (AT) graduates and employers of AT graduates. The Athletic Training Alumni Opinion Survey (ATAOS) and Athletic Training Employer Opinion Survey (ATEOS). Design and Setting: A critical review of the instruments by groups of recent AT graduates, employers of recent AT graduates, and ATEP directors established validity. To determine reliability, we used a test-retest method in which participants completed the assessment twice. Participants: We solicited recent graduates (n = 121 first completion and n = 52 for second completion) from a random sample of accredited ATEPs across the nation. Participants gave us permission to contact their employers (n = 47 first completion and n = 23 second completion). Data Collection and Analysis: We collected data via Qualtics (Qualtrics, Inc., Provo, UT). For our analysis, we entered test-retest data into SPSS 17 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). For both alumni and employers, we calculated Cronbach's alpha scores for each variable on the first completion set of data and Pearson product correlations between the first completion and second completion data set for each variable. Results: Cronbach's alpha scores for both the ATAOS (〈= .820) and ATEOS (〈= .971) instruments were high. Correlation values for each variable were moderate to high except for one variable within the ATAOS instrument (Importance of Advising) and one variable within the ATEOS instrument (Foundation Professional Behavior of Legal Practice). Conclusions: We have developed a valid and reliable set of instruments that we hope all accredited ATEPs use as part of their overall assessment system.

No abstract