Scientific Society of Physiotherapy at the University School of Physical Education in

Poznań

AN ATTEMPT TO EVALUATE AN ATTEMPT TO EVALUATE STUDENTS’ PREPARATION STUDENTS’ PREPARATION

FOR PHYSIOTHERAPIST FOR PHYSIOTHERAPIST PROFESSION.PROFESSION.

P. Wilkosz, B. Kuczerowska, P. Owczarczak, P. Rąglewska, N. Jachimowicz – Markiewicz, P.Korman, D. Łochyński, S. Kowalik

Degree of student’ preparatia Degree of student’ preparatia for for physiotherapistphysiotherapist profession was evaluated. Students of profession was evaluated. Students of

physiotherapy at the physiotherapy at the University SchoolUniversity School of of Physical EducationPhysical Education (USPE) (USPE) and students of and students of Health Science Faculty at the Health Science Faculty at the University of University of

Medical Sciences (UMS)Medical Sciences (UMS) in Poznań took part in in Poznań took part in the research.the research.

Three notions were included in the Three notions were included in the research:research:

I. I. How do students appreciateHow do students appreciate the usefulness of the subjects the usefulness of the subjects lectured during the studies, for lectured during the studies, for their future profession ?their future profession ?

II. II. How do students evaluate their own preparation for How do students evaluate their own preparation for working with retarded people ?working with retarded people ?

III. III. To what degree do students feel the need to develop their To what degree do students feel the need to develop their professional knowledge ?professional knowledge ?

AIMAIM::Collecting students’ opinion about their Collecting students’ opinion about their preparation for the professionpreparation for the profession..

METHODMETHOD::80 80 questionnairesquestionnaires. . Questions were divided into 3 Questions were divided into 3 subcategoriessubcategories..Answers to most of the questions were put Answers to most of the questions were put on 0 to 100 scale, in decimal system. One on 0 to 100 scale, in decimal system. One question was open to students’ opinion.question was open to students’ opinion.

MATERIAMATERIALL::

IV IV year studentsyear students. .

University of Medical Sciences (UMS) University of Medical Sciences (UMS) PoznańPoznań, 31, 31 students( students(24 24 womenwomen, 7 , 7 menmen).). University School of Physical Education University School of Physical Education Poznań (USPE)Poznań (USPE), , 49 49 studentsstudents (36 (36 womenwomen,, 13 13 menmen).).

The results of the The results of the questionnaires are presented questionnaires are presented

belowbelow..

LegendLegend::

* p < 0,05 (Student’s Test )

T – theoretical knowledgeP – practical knowledge

SubcategorySubcategory I I Students opinion about the usefulness of the subjects Students opinion about the usefulness of the subjects

lectured during their studies in their future profession lectured during their studies in their future profession was presented on the percentage scalewas presented on the percentage scale..

0102030405060708090

100

Kinezytherapy T KinezytherapyP*

PhysicalMedicine T*

PhysicalMedicine P

UMSUSPE

Students opinion about the usefulness of the subjects Students opinion about the usefulness of the subjects lectured during their studies in their future profession lectured during their studies in their future profession

was presented on the percentage scalewas presented on the percentage scale..

0102030405060708090

100

Didactic aids* Psychology Sport Activities Diagnosticknowledge

UMSUSPE

ResultsResults::

1. 1. Students of University of Medical Sciences and Students of University of Medical Sciences and University School of Physical Education declare similar University School of Physical Education declare similar level of practical and theoretical preparation for level of practical and theoretical preparation for kinezytherapy exercises, wich is 60%.kinezytherapy exercises, wich is 60%.

2. 2. The difference in theoretical preparation for modalities The difference in theoretical preparation for modalities treatment between UMS and USPE is 15treatment between UMS and USPE is 15%% (61% for (61% for UMS, 76% for USPE), while practical preparation is 67% UMS, 76% for USPE), while practical preparation is 67% for UMS and 62% for USPE, which gives the difference of for UMS and 62% for USPE, which gives the difference of 5%5%. .

3. 3. Students of UMS evaluate didactic aids during practical Students of UMS evaluate didactic aids during practical classes higher than students of the USPE – the difference classes higher than students of the USPE – the difference is 20%, 63% for UMS and 43% for USPE.is 20%, 63% for UMS and 43% for USPE.

4. 4. Sport and Psychology classes were evaluated on the Sport and Psychology classes were evaluated on the similar level by students of both Universities – the mean similar level by students of both Universities – the mean value was 81%.value was 81%.

5. 5. The ability to diagnose the patient without doctor’s The ability to diagnose the patient without doctor’s help were evaluated on the similar level by students of help were evaluated on the similar level by students of both Universities – the mean value was 40%both Universities – the mean value was 40% . .

Subjects which are not usefull for Subjects which are not usefull for physiotherapist professionphysiotherapist profession::

- - University of Medical Sciences – 67% ecology, University of Medical Sciences – 67% ecology, 61% philosophy, 35% 61% philosophy, 35% metodology of scientific metodology of scientific research.research.

- - University School of Physical Education – University School of Physical Education – 45% 45% metodology of scientific researchmetodology of scientific research, 35% , 35% sociology, 33% theory of physical education.sociology, 33% theory of physical education.

SubcategorySubcategory II IIEvaluation of preparation for working with people of Evaluation of preparation for working with people of

various types of disabilities.various types of disabilities.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Cardiology* Pulmunology* Pediatrics* Gynecology* Surgery*

UMSUSPE

Evaluation of preparation for working with people of Evaluation of preparation for working with people of various types of disabilities.various types of disabilities.

0102030405060708090

100

Adults withmovement

impairment T

Adults withmovement

impairment P*

Mentally retardedadults T*

Mentally retardedadults P

UMSUSPE

0102030405060708090

100

Children withmovement

impairment T

Children withmovement

impairment P

Mentally retardedchildren T*

Mentally retardedchildren P*

UMSUSPE

Evaluation of preparation for working with people of Evaluation of preparation for working with people of various types of disabilities.various types of disabilities.

ResultsResults::

1. 1. The difference in preparation for working with people in both groups The difference in preparation for working with people in both groups of students was 21% (65% for UMS and 44% for USPE).of students was 21% (65% for UMS and 44% for USPE).

2. 2. The difference in theoretical preparation for working with retarded The difference in theoretical preparation for working with retarded people both children and adults (mentally and physically retarded) was people both children and adults (mentally and physically retarded) was 6%, (55% for UMS and 49% for USPE).6%, (55% for UMS and 49% for USPE).

3. 3. The difference in practical preparation for working with retarded The difference in practical preparation for working with retarded people both children and adults (mentally and physically retarded) was people both children and adults (mentally and physically retarded) was 9%, (55% for UMS and 46% for USPE).9%, (55% for UMS and 46% for USPE).

4. 4. The greatest difference in students’ preparation for working with The greatest difference in students’ preparation for working with retarded people was observed in gynaecology, it was 60%, (66% for UMS retarded people was observed in gynaecology, it was 60%, (66% for UMS and 6% for USPE).and 6% for USPE).

SubcategorySubcategory III IIIThe value of students’ opinion for developing the The value of students’ opinion for developing the

professional knowledgeprofessional knowledge..

Literature reading Post-graduate studies Trainings, courses Studies abroad

UMS USPE UMS USPE UMS USPE UMS USPE

Physical Medicine

T 46 34 20 23 41 35 20 29

P 33 36 23 28 49 53 22 36

KinezytherapyT 35 40 26 32 63 58 25* 40*

P 30 38 32 34 75 76 33 47

DiagnosisT 46 41 29 25 66 55 27 38

P 42 43 32 29 75 70 31 44

PsychotherapyT 31 32 23 19 39 37 18 23

P 24 31 24 23 44 50 20 25

ResultsResults::

1. 1. Students of both Universities displayed the need to Students of both Universities displayed the need to develop their practical and theoretical knowledge in fields develop their practical and theoretical knowledge in fields such as: physical medicine, kinezytherapy, diagnosis, such as: physical medicine, kinezytherapy, diagnosis, psychotherapy. Mean value was 37%.psychotherapy. Mean value was 37%.

2. 2. Both Universities respondents declare the need to Both Universities respondents declare the need to develop their professional knowledge by studying develop their professional knowledge by studying literature, post-graduate studies, trainings and courses. literature, post-graduate studies, trainings and courses. Students of the USPE displayed greater eagerness to study Students of the USPE displayed greater eagerness to study abroad – the difference was 10% (USPE students 35%, abroad – the difference was 10% (USPE students 35%, UMS students 25%).UMS students 25%).

Thank you for your Thank you for your attentionattention..

www.fizjoterapia.hejhej.netwww.fizjoterapia.hejhej.net