Limits...
The research capacity and culture of Australian podiatrists.

Williams CM, Lazzarini PA - J Foot Ankle Res (2015)

Bottom Line: Best practice clinical health care is widely recognised to be founded on evidence based practice.Podiatrists working in multi-practitioner workplaces reported higher individual success or skills in the majority of items compared with sole practitioners (p < 0.05).Non-clinical and public health sector podiatrists reported significantly higher post-graduate study enrolment or completion, research activity participation, provisions to undertake research and individual success or skill than those working privately.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Peninsula Health, Community Health, PO Box 52, Frankston, VIC 3199 Australia ; Monash University, School of Physiotherapy, Frankston, VIC 3199 Australia.

ABSTRACT

Background: Best practice clinical health care is widely recognised to be founded on evidence based practice. Enhancing evidence based practice via the rapid translation of new evidence into every day clinical practice is fundamental to the success of health care and in turn health care professions. There is little known about the collective research capacity and culture of the podiatry profession across Australia. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the research capacity and culture of the podiatry profession within Australia and determine if there were any differences between podiatrists working in different health sectors and workplaces.

Method: All registered podiatrists were eligible to participate in a cross-sectional online survey. The Australian Podiatry Associations disseminated the survey and all podiatrists were encouraged to distribute it to colleagues. The Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool was used to collect all research capacity and culture item variables using a 10-point scale (1 = lowest; 10 = highest). Additional demographic, workplace and health sector data variables were also collected. Mann-Whitney-U, Kruskal-Wallis and logistic regression analyses were used to determine any difference between health sectors and workplaces. Word cloud analysis was used for qualitative responses of individual motivators and barriers to research culture.

Results: There were 232 fully completed surveys (6% of Australian registered podiatrists). Overall respondents reported low success or skills (Median rating < 4) on the majority of individual success or skill items. Podiatrists working in multi-practitioner workplaces reported higher individual success or skills in the majority of items compared with sole practitioners (p < 0.05). Non-clinical and public health sector podiatrists reported significantly higher post-graduate study enrolment or completion, research activity participation, provisions to undertake research and individual success or skill than those working privately.

Conclusions: This study suggests that podiatrists in Australia report similar low levels of research success or skill to those reported in other allied health professions. The workplace setting and health sector seem to play key roles in self reported research success and skills. This is important knowledge for podiatrists and researchers aiming to translate research evidence into clinical practice.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Differences in individuals based on primary health sector of employment (medians shown).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4384230&req=5

Fig1: Differences in individuals based on primary health sector of employment (medians shown).

Mentions: Table 3 reports the median ratings and interquartile range results, for the sections pertaining to individual research skills, for all participants and the workplace subgroups. Participants working in multi-practitioner workplaces (n = 157) recorded significantly higher individual skill levels in all items compared with those working as sole practitioners (n = 81) (p < 0.01). Table 4 reports the results of individual research skill for the primary health sector of practice subgroups. Median scores increased in all individual research skill items for each health sector from private, public community, public hospital, to non-clinical sector subgroups as illustrated in Figure 1 (p < 0.01).Table 3


The research capacity and culture of Australian podiatrists.

Williams CM, Lazzarini PA - J Foot Ankle Res (2015)

Differences in individuals based on primary health sector of employment (medians shown).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4384230&req=5

Fig1: Differences in individuals based on primary health sector of employment (medians shown).
Mentions: Table 3 reports the median ratings and interquartile range results, for the sections pertaining to individual research skills, for all participants and the workplace subgroups. Participants working in multi-practitioner workplaces (n = 157) recorded significantly higher individual skill levels in all items compared with those working as sole practitioners (n = 81) (p < 0.01). Table 4 reports the results of individual research skill for the primary health sector of practice subgroups. Median scores increased in all individual research skill items for each health sector from private, public community, public hospital, to non-clinical sector subgroups as illustrated in Figure 1 (p < 0.01).Table 3

Bottom Line: Best practice clinical health care is widely recognised to be founded on evidence based practice.Podiatrists working in multi-practitioner workplaces reported higher individual success or skills in the majority of items compared with sole practitioners (p < 0.05).Non-clinical and public health sector podiatrists reported significantly higher post-graduate study enrolment or completion, research activity participation, provisions to undertake research and individual success or skill than those working privately.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Peninsula Health, Community Health, PO Box 52, Frankston, VIC 3199 Australia ; Monash University, School of Physiotherapy, Frankston, VIC 3199 Australia.

ABSTRACT

Background: Best practice clinical health care is widely recognised to be founded on evidence based practice. Enhancing evidence based practice via the rapid translation of new evidence into every day clinical practice is fundamental to the success of health care and in turn health care professions. There is little known about the collective research capacity and culture of the podiatry profession across Australia. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the research capacity and culture of the podiatry profession within Australia and determine if there were any differences between podiatrists working in different health sectors and workplaces.

Method: All registered podiatrists were eligible to participate in a cross-sectional online survey. The Australian Podiatry Associations disseminated the survey and all podiatrists were encouraged to distribute it to colleagues. The Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool was used to collect all research capacity and culture item variables using a 10-point scale (1 = lowest; 10 = highest). Additional demographic, workplace and health sector data variables were also collected. Mann-Whitney-U, Kruskal-Wallis and logistic regression analyses were used to determine any difference between health sectors and workplaces. Word cloud analysis was used for qualitative responses of individual motivators and barriers to research culture.

Results: There were 232 fully completed surveys (6% of Australian registered podiatrists). Overall respondents reported low success or skills (Median rating < 4) on the majority of individual success or skill items. Podiatrists working in multi-practitioner workplaces reported higher individual success or skills in the majority of items compared with sole practitioners (p < 0.05). Non-clinical and public health sector podiatrists reported significantly higher post-graduate study enrolment or completion, research activity participation, provisions to undertake research and individual success or skill than those working privately.

Conclusions: This study suggests that podiatrists in Australia report similar low levels of research success or skill to those reported in other allied health professions. The workplace setting and health sector seem to play key roles in self reported research success and skills. This is important knowledge for podiatrists and researchers aiming to translate research evidence into clinical practice.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus