d3.6a leuven pilot module (final - v1.2)

CMAster Project Deliverable 3.6a:

Leuven Pilot

Version History

Version Date Change Author(s)

1.0 20 Mar 2014 First Draft Anne Cazaerck

1.1 5 May 2014 Approved Anne Cazaerck

Contents

Version History ...................................................................................................................... 1

Contents................................................................................................................................ 1

Aim ....................................................................................................................................... 1

1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2

2: Prototype: Extra course for local students ........................................................................... 2

Overall goal ........................................................................................................................ 2

Value ................................................................................................................................. 3

Potential for improvement ................................................................................................... 3

On-line publication .............................................................................................................. 4

Practical applicability ........................................................................................................... 4

Reflection on feedback and recommendations for the future ................................................. 4

3 Pilot: 2-day residential course for external students............................................................... 5

Overall Goal ....................................................................................................................... 5

Value ................................................................................................................................. 6

On-line publication .............................................................................................................. 6

Practical application ............................................................................................................ 6

General comments ............................................................................................................. 8

Reflection on feedback and recommendations for the future ................................................ 8

Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 9

A1 Front cover of questionnaire ........................................................................................... 9

A2 Pictures from the Pilot .................................................................................................. 10

A3 Attendance lists ........................................................................................................... 11

Aim

This is a pilot of a 2-day residential course held at the KU Leuven on 24th and 25th March 2014.

The bulk of this deliverable is the report of an evaluation of this course (and a local prototype)

based on questionnaire assessments of student opinion.

2 | D3.6a Leuven pilot course

1 Introduction

The pilot module organized by Leuven consisted of two parts. The first one was for local

students. It was rather a small module that was meant to prepare the two days pilot course. This

second module was the main focus of the work package and the goal was to give a two days course for international students. More information about the content of the pilot modules and

the evaluations of the students can be found in the next paragraphs.

2: Prototype: Extra course for local students

Fifteen students attended the extra course that is part of Leuvens pilot module (first part). The goal of this extra class was to link physical examination to gait analysis by the use of clinical

cases. The entire class was videotaped and students have the possibility to see the class again

via Toledo (Blackboard). After the class the students had to fill in an evaluation form so that we have a better view on the positive and negative items regarding this extra class. A summary of

the answers can be found below.

Overall goal

The goal of this extra course was to link physical examination to gait analysis by the

use of clinical cases. Do you agree that this goal was reached? Give a value between

0 and 10 (0 = I dont agree at all, 10 = I fully agree) + explain

Main score: 7.9/10

General comments (literally taken from the evaluation forms):

Positive comments

Clear link with physical examination, thanks to the prediction of gait for every muscle group.

The example was very well explained. It was a nice repetition of the already given information. The integration was clearly

showed.

Clear explanation and repetition of the lessons was reached. Better for clinical reasoning. It was well explained by using the important gait analysis reports. First good overview and repetition of clinical evaluation. Afterwards good link of this

clinical examination with gait analysis.

The last part of the course gives a good overview and conclusion. Especially the last part was interesting. The slides were very clear. It was good to have an overview with links between each lesson. All the things were already known but we have never seen how to link them. Now you know where to focus on.

Negative comments

Too much information about physical examination alone. Too fast at the end when combination physical examination and gait analysis was made. Sometimes we were talking to long about clinical examination and less about the more

difficult part of gait analysis.

The last part of the evaluation of the gait data was given too quickly.


Value

Was it a surplus value to follow this extra class? How helpful was it to understand the subject material better? Give a value between 0 and 10 (0 = not helpful at all, 10

= extremely helpful) + explain

Main score: 7.4/10


Positive comments

Good summary of the courses. The more we can practice and receive some more explanation, the better we are

prepared for the practical work.

It was a good repetition. Repetition is never bad. Better insight. It helps to give more insight in how to see what is important towards physiotherapy and

good link of previous lessons.

Negative comments

Not a lot of new insight. The link with gait analysis was given very fast and so it was difficult to follow.

Potential for improvement

In what way can this class be improved? If no improvements are required, what

were the positive features?


Less focus on physical examination. More attention on case. Slow pace of the lesson. Maybe spend more time on the gait analysis. The physical examination is better known

than the gait analysis. Positive: Step-by-step explanation is clear. Give more time to the students so that they can think themselves. Perhaps students can

prepare cases in advance and discuss them during the classes. Maybe it is better to make a little bit more time for the part were physical examination is

linked to gait analysis. It was a little bit too fast to make notes and understand it completely.

Positive item is that an overview of the clinical examination was given first. The link with gait analysis was given too fast, because I am not so familiar with all the graphs.

The presentation was good and was structured very well. More interaction is necessary. More time is necessary to let the students understand all

the links.


On-line publication

If these classes will be posted online (on Toledo), in what way will they help you to give insight in the course material?


Clear case explained in detail to practice theory on. Yes, I could see the lesson again and repeat issues I did not fully understand. Sometimes it goes really fast. When studying, you can look again. Everyone can see the video, therefore it might be that students will not attend the

classes. I will study it and hopefully it will help me understand the other cases more. A good support for other lessons. It helps the clinical reasoning process. You can look back at it and you have as much time as necessary. If I dont understand something from the course, I can look at the video for some extra

explanation.

Gives more structure in the notes and it is nice to learn from a video. You can make the case again as an exercise while studying.

Practical applicability

Do you think that this kind of classes will prepare you in a better way towards the

practical work in a clinical setting? Give a value between 0 and 10 (0 = not helpful at all, 10 = extremely helpful) + explain

Main score: 7.4/10


Already a lot of examples in course to give good preparation for practice. The more exercises, the better. Repetition is always helpful. Useful insight (which we might not think of directly). It makes you more critical to make a judgment. More training is needed to really use it in practice. However, with the individual

discussion of certain muscles and the link to gait analysis, it is already more clear. Maybe more practical examples (more specific exercises) are helpful. I already work in a practice and have a CP-patient. I find it helpful because I now know

that it is really important to work functionally.

If there is a good communication between your private practice and the gait lab, this can give you important information therapy.

Reflection on feedback and recommendations for the future

The students were in general satisfied about the extra course. The presentation was clear and

the course subjects were complementary to the classes that they have had before. However, students found that the clinical examination was explained in too much detail and that there was

not enough time to discuss the link between clinical examination and gait in more detail.

Therefore we will put more focus on the interpretation in the future.


3 Pilot: 2-day residential course for external students

Six students attended the 2-days pilot course at Leuven; one each from Malta, Germany, Holland, Belgium and two from the UK.

The content of the course was the following:

Monday the 24th of March

10am 1pm Theoretical class about clinical examination, gait and gait deviations and the link between clinical examination and gait.

2pm 4pm Introduction to a clinical case. Work on clinical cases (link between clinical examination and gait analysis) in small groups.

4pm 6pm Discussion on clinical cases with the entire group.

Tuesday the 25th of March

9am 9.30am Short introduction in the clinical gait lab at University Hospital of Pellenberg.

9.30am 11am Hands-on clinical examination on a patient.

11am 1pm Case discussion of the same patient from the clinical examination, but regarding data from several years before.

After completing the course, students filled in an evaluation questionnaire. The results can be found below.

Overall Goal

The goal of this extra course was to link physical examination to gait analysis by

using clinical cases. Do you agree that this goal was reached? Give a value

between 0 and 10 (0 = I dont agree at all, 10 = I fully agree) + explain.

Main score: 9.4 / 10


The physical examination was done very well and discrepancies between different

organizations were well explained.

I did not have enough time to exercise on my own, namely to link the facts to the plots of gait analysis data.

Excellent link regarding to the real aspect of walking. More outlining the positives

and negatives/drawbacks of clinical examination.

The course was very comprehensive and supported by excellent video material and practical session.

A good overview of the physical exam as performed in Leuven. Due to the

international composition of the group, discussions about parts of the exam and

differences in performance were valuable.


Value

Was it a surplus value to follow this extra class? How helpful was it to

understand the subject material better? Give a value between 0 and 10 (0 = not

helpful at all, 10 = extremely helpful) + explain.

Main score: 9.4/10

General comments (literally taken from the evaluation forms): It was very beneficial, but I think other people with existing protocols will# learn a lot if they

would like to modify#there#clinical#examination.! I got a lot of good information to adjust our clinical examination. Lots of reflection. Excellent opportunity to look at other professionals gait lab set

up and debate areas with peers. Having taught material was a nice chance to self

learnt material.

The course was extremely helpful and has given me a good foundation for the module of next year.

On-line publication

Some parts of the course are recorded. If these parts will be posted online, in

what way will they help you to give insight in the course material?


Some of the lecture notes could not show images/videos so clear. But if clear videos

would be posted online, it would be very beneficial and also for others to view.

To structure how to get through the analysis and to structure how to link it. Providing the ability to go back and review the lecture particularly the spoken

elements not presented on the handouts.

Visual feedback is very important as a way of good understanding. Looking back difficult parts or to discuss in own centre if changes or adaptations to

the examination or clinical interpretation should be evaluated.

Practical application

Do you think that this kind of classes will prepare you in a better way towards

the practical work in a clinical setting? Give a value between 0 and 10 (0 = not

helpful at all, 10 = extremely helpful) + explain.

Main score: 9.2/10


Yes, because we are still trying to set up a good clinical assessment. It was practical and therefore easy to transfer. It has provided affirmation of my practice but also generated new ideas to consider

and the possibility to integrate it into the clinical assessment.

Yes it was very useful and gave a value insight into how other labs work. Information on clinical practice from an experienced centre can help to view forms

or evaluate internal processes on clinical practice.

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication (communication) reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

General comments

Looking back on your overall experience of this course, please provide constructive

feedback on the most positive aspects and any changes you recommend.

Best thing(s) about this course:

Small group, so it was efficient to work on the material. Nice teaching team, constructive. Course content/presentation Discussions Practical session (with patient). Teaching Supplementary video material. The structured overview of the physical examination and the integration of all

data exercises.

The thing(s) I would change:

More time to get used to the linkage of data across.

A longer 2nd day. Directions to university could perhaps be more detailed. Information about the course and timetable available at least 2 weeks before start

of the course.

Reflection on feedback and recommendations for the future

The students were very satisfied about the 2 days pilot course at Leuven. They found that the course was structured well and that the video material was very supportive. The practical session and the

group discussions were certainly a surplus value. These items should be therefore maintained for the

future. However, a few things need to be changed. First of all, more attention should be spent on the interpretation(link between clinical examination and gait) and the clinical cases. Furthermore, we

have to give the participants the information about the exact content and timetable of the course and the locations earlier.

9 | D3.6a Leuven pilot

Appendices

A1 Front cover of questionnaire


A2 Pictures from the Pilot


A3 Attendance lists

Note that students have signed in with their academic affiliation rather than place of residence.

d3.6a leuven pilot module (final - v1.2)

Documents