Article

Clinical specialists and advanced practitioners in physical therapy: a survey of physical therapists and employers of physical therapists in ontario, Canada.

Darryl Yardley, PT: Physical therapist and graduate of the MSc(PT) Program, Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario.
Physiotherapy Canada (Impact Factor: 0.61). 01/2008; 60(3):224-38. DOI: 10.3138/physio.60.3.224
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Opportunities to expand the role of physical therapists (PTs) have evolved to include clinical specialists and advanced practitioners, although the literature on these roles is limited. We examined perceptions of PTs and PT employers in Ontario regarding clinical specialization and advanced practice.
Using a modified Dillman approach, a cross-sectional survey was conducted with 500 PTs and 500 PT employers in Ontario. Questionnaires were tailored to address specific issues related to each cohort.
Sixty percent of PTs and 53% of PT employers responded to the survey. Thirty-three percent of PT respondents already considered themselves "clinical specialists" (CS), and 8% considered themselves "advanced practitioners" (AP), although neither role is yet formally recognized in Canada. Both groups had substantial interest in pursuing formal recognition of CS and AP status. Respondents indicated that their primary motivation to pursue such roles was to enhance clinical reasoning skills with the goal of improving client outcomes (82% for the role of CS, 71% for the role of AP). Respondents supported the involvement of academic institutions in the process (60% for CS, 70% for AP).
PTs and PT employers are supportive of the roles of the CS and AP within the profession, even though there is currently no formal recognition of either role in Canada.

Full-text

Available from: Cathy Evans, Oct 09, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
89 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose : To examine the attitudes of a self-selected sample of Canadian physical therapists toward the transition from bachelor's to master's degrees and the implementation of clinical doctorate degrees in physical therapy (PT). Methods : A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a modified Dillman tailored approach. All eligible members of the Canadian Physiotherapy Association (CPA) were invited to participate. Of 1,397 Canadian physical therapists who responded to the survey, 45% favoured the transition from bachelor's to master's degrees, 21% did not, and 34% were neutral; 27% favoured a transition from a master's to a doctoral degree for entry into practice in PT, 53% did not favour this transition, and 20% were neutral. Finally, 56% favoured the implementation of a post-professional clinical doctorate (PPCD) in PT, 23% did not, and 21% were neutral. Overall, a self-selected sample of Canadian physical therapists supported the future implementation of a post-professional clinical doctorate degree in PT but did not support an entry-to-practice doctoral degree. However, these results must be interpreted with caution because of the study's small sample size.
    Physiotherapy Canada 01/2014; 66(4):392-401. DOI:10.3138/ptc.2013-40 · 0.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: To determine the extent of presentation and publication, as well as time to publication, of student research completed as a component of a Master of Science in Physical Therapy (MScPT) degree at a Canadian university. Method: The authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of MScPT research projects completed between 2003 and 2009, each undertaken by a group of MScPT students who carried out protocol development, ethics submission, data collection, analysis, and manuscript and poster preparation under the supervision of research advisors. Research advisors were e-mailed a request for citations of presentations and publications. Results: Advisors from 102 of 113 research projects completed from 2003 through 2009 provided information, for a response rate of 90.3%. Of the 102 groups, 53.9% disseminated findings through publication or presentation, 33.3% presented at one or more conferences, and 30.4% published at least one peer-reviewed journal article. Median time to publication was 21 months. Almost half the journal articles (47%) were published in Physiotherapy Canada. Conclusions: MScPT student research groups are disseminating their findings through publication or presentation at a moderate rate. Investigation of factors influencing dissemination is needed to develop strategies to facilitate knowledge transfer.
    Physiotherapy Canada 01/2013; 65(2):154-157. DOI:10.3138/ptc.2012-18 · 0.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To explore Ontario physiotherapists' opinions on their ability to order diagnostic imaging (DI). An online questionnaire was sent to all registered members of the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario. Descriptive statistics were calculated using response frequencies. Practice characteristics were compared using χ(2) tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Of 1,574 respondents (21% response rate), 42% practised in orthopaedics and 53% in the public sector. Most physiotherapists were interested in ordering DI (72% MRI/diagnostic ultrasound, 78% X-rays/computed tomography scans). Respondents with an orthopaedic caseload of 50% or more (p<0.001) and those in the private sector (p<0.001) were more interested in ordering DI. Respondents preferred a DI course that combined face-to-face and Web-based components and one that was specific to their area of practice. Most respondents perceived minimal barriers to the uptake of ordering DI, and most agreed that support from other health care professionals would facilitate uptake. The majority of Ontario physiotherapists are interested in ordering DI. For successful implementation of a health care change, such as physiotherapists' ability to order DI, educational needs and barriers to and facilitators of the uptake of the authorized activity should be considered.
    Physiotherapy Canada 01/2015; 67(2):144-56. DOI:10.3138/ptc.2014-09 · 0.61 Impact Factor