Background: Professional competence of young occupational therapists is enhanced through on-site resources, hands-on training and outcome-based education. The Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) is a work-based assessment to evaluate professional knowledge, skills and attitude in occupational therapy (OT) clinical training. The perspectives of OT fieldwork teachers and trainees regarding the DOPS are important, but rarely investigated. This study aimed to investigate the perspectives of OT educators and trainees in using DOPS and their discrepancy for OT post-graduate year (PGY) training.Methods: An online survey was distributed to OT educators and trainees who participated in OT PGY training. The survey comprised five sections: demographic information, the practicality in using the DOPS in clinical settings, the ease of rating the DOPS, and advantages and disadvantages of the DOPS. The responses were based on a 5-point Likert scale. A score of 4 or 5 indicated that the responder agreed/simple or strongly agreed/very simple with the statement. A total of 86 and 41 surveys from OT teachers and trainees were returned respectively, and 64 and 30 from OT teachers and trainees who used DOPS were analyzed.Results: Over 70 percent of OT educators and trainees agreed that clinical resources (i.e., time, personnel support and cooperation, feedback and training) were sufficient when using the DOPS. Most OT educators and trainees agreed that DOPS matched with OT training goals, benefited the OT competence training and had a fair, objective and consistent scoring system. A significant higher percentage of OT trainees felt stressful in DOPS assessment than that of trainers. Significant higher percentages of OT trainees strongly agreed that DOPS was a practical and appropriate assessment for OT competence training, and had a fair, objective and consistent scoring system than those of OT teachers. There were no significant differences between teachers and trainees regarding easiness of rating DOPS items.Conclusion: Most OT educators and trainees agreed that DOPS was a practical and appropriate assessment for the OT PGY training.
Introduction. Assessment of clinical competence is a significant part of the training for young occupational therapists (OTs). Objective and systematic assessment allows both supervisors and trainees to be aware of the training objectives and monitor the progress. The direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) is a work-based assessment to evaluate professional knowledge, skills, and attitude in clinical training. This study investigated the perspectives of OT educators and trainees on using DOPS and their discrepancy for OT postgraduate year (PGY) training. Methods. This study used a quantitative online survey. Eighty-six supervisors and 41 trainees of OT PGY training programs from 95 hospitals returned the questionnaire (a 90.5% return rate), and 64 supervisors and 30 trainees who used DOPS were analyzed. Outcomes included the practicality in using the DOPS in clinical settings, the ease of rating the DOPS, and advantages and the disadvantages of the DOPS. Results. Most respondents reported that completing one DOPS required at least 11 minutes for direct observation (11-40 minutes: teacher 92.2%; trainee 80.6%). Most respondents (teacher 96.9%, trainee 96.8%) had feedback after direct observation of DOPS, and about half of the feedback assessments took 5 to 10 minutes (teacher 53.1%, trainee 48.4%). Most OT educators and trainees agreed that clinical resources were sufficient and that DOPS matched with OT training goals, benefited OT competence training, and had a fair, objective, and consistent scoring system. Significantly higher percentages of OT trainees felt stressed in and satisfied with the DOPS assessment than trainers. Differences between teachers and trainees regarding easiness of rating DOPS items were not significant. Conclusion. Most OT educators and trainees agreed that DOPS was a practical and appropriate assessment for OT PGY training.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
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.