PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16619102

Peer-assisted learning in the athletic training clinical setting.

Abstract

CONTEXT: Athletic training educators often anecdotally suggest that athletic training students enhance their learning by teaching their peers. However, peer-assisted learning (PAL) has not been examined within athletic training education in order to provide evidence for its current use or as a pedagogic tool. OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence of PAL in athletic training clinical education and to identify students' perceptions of PAL. DESIGN: Descriptive. SETTING: "The Athletic Training Student Seminar" at the National Athletic Trainers' Association 2002 Annual Meeting and Clinical Symposia. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 138 entry-level male and female athletic training students. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Students' perceptions regarding the prevalence and benefits of and preferences for PAL were measured using the Athletic Training Peer-Assisted Learning Assessment Survey. The Survey is a self-report tool with 4 items regarding the prevalence of PAL and 7 items regarding perceived benefits and preferences. RESULTS: A total of 66% of participants practiced a moderate to large amount of their clinical skills with other athletic training students. Sixty percent of students reported feeling less anxious when performing clinical skills on patients in front of other athletic training students than in front of their clinical instructors. Chi-square analysis revealed that 91% of students enrolled in Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs-accredited athletic training education programs learned a minimal to small amount of clinical skills from their peers compared with 65% of students in Joint Review Committee on Educational Programs in Athletic Training-candidacy schools (chi2(3) = 14.57, P < .01). Multiple analysis of variance revealed significant interactions between sex and academic level on several items regarding benefits and preferences. CONCLUSIONS: According to athletic training students, PAL is occurring in the athletic training clinical setting. Entry-level students are utilizing their peers as resources for practicing clinical skills and report benefiting from the collaboration. Educators should consider deliberately integrating PAL into athletic training education programs to enhance student learning and collaboration.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jolene M Henning, Thomas G Weidner, James Jones. Peer-assisted learning in the athletic training clinical setting.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16619102/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗