Athletic Trainers' Current Knowledge and Envisioned Use of Foundational Evidence-Based Practice Concepts

Autor/inn/en	Manspeaker, Sarah A.; Hankemeier, Dorice A.
Titel	Athletic Trainers' Current Knowledge and Envisioned Use of Foundational Evidence-Based Practice Concepts
Quelle	In: Athletic Training Education Journal, 12 (2017) 2, S.121-133 (13 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1947-380X
DOI	10.4085/1202121
Schlagwörter	Athletics; Allied Health Personnel; Evidence Based Practice; Professional Continuing Education; Mixed Methods Research; Knowledge Level; Attitudes; Barriers; Surveys; Correlation; Workshops; Fundamental Concepts; Confidence Testing + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Leichtathletik; Berufsfeldbezogener Unterricht; Weiterbildung; Wissensbasis; Attitude; Einstellung; Verhalten; Survey; Umfrage; Befragung; Korrelation; Lernwerkstatt; Schulung; Grundlagenplan; Konzept
Abstract	Context: The Board of Certification (BOC) requires 10 continuing education units (CEUs) in evidence-based practice (EBP) each reporting period. It is unknown whether participation in programming in the Foundations category for CEUs results in improved knowledge of and confidence in EBP. Objective: To examine a continuing professional education (CPE) program in relation to perceived knowledge of and confidence in EBP concepts among athletic trainers (ATs) and to determine ATs' perceptions regarding barriers to, use of, and resources for EBP. Design: Mixed-methods, within-subjects design; preintervention-postintervention evaluation of ATs' EBP knowledge and perceptions. Setting: A CPE workshop hosted at 2 Division I universities. Patients or Other Participants: Convenience sample of 123 AT workshop attendees. Intervention(s): Five-hour BOC-approved Foundations of EBP workshop. Main Outcome Measure(s): The Evidence-Based Concepts: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Use survey. The ATs' EBP knowledge was assessed via multiple-choice questions. Descriptive statistics, differences between scores, and correlations were ascertained. Open-ended questions were classified according to common themes and coded. Results: The 11-point knowledge score showed knowledge increased significantly (t = -12.42, P < 0.001, d = 1.31, 95% confidence interval = -2.41, -1.75) preworkshop (mean = 6.39 ± 1.63) to postworkshop (mean = 8.47 ± 1.55). Confidence in knowledge increased significantly (z = -9.51, P < 0.001) preworkshop (median = 26) to postworkshop (median = 38). The ATs identified barriers to EBP use as time, resources, environment, and experience in EBP; envisioned use of EBP included implementing patient-reported outcomes and internet resources. Conclusions: This workshop demonstrated improved immediate perceived knowledge and confidence in EBP concepts. Although a larger number of clinical EBP programs have been approved by the BOC, Foundations of EBP programming is valuable for CEU opportunities to narrow the gap regarding EBP knowledge. Future investigations may evaluate transference of EBP knowledge into professional practice. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	National Athletic Trainers' Association. 2952 Stemmons Freeway Suite 200, Dallas, TX 75247. Tel: 214-637-6282; Fax: 214-637-2206; e-mail: ATEdJournal@gmail.com; Web site: http://nataej.org/journal-information.htm
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01