title: Evaluation of athletic training students' clinical proficiencies.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Appropriate methods for evaluating clinical proficiencies are essential in ensuring entry-level competence.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To investigate the common methods athletic training education programs use to evaluate student performance of clinical proficiencies.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross-sectional design.
  
  
  METHODS
  Public and private institutions nationwide.
  
  
  METHODS
  All program directors of athletic training education programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs as of January 2006 (n = 337); 201 (59.6%) program directors responded.
  
  
  METHODS
  The institutional survey consisted of 11 items regarding institutional and program demographics. The 14-item Methods of Clinical Proficiency Evaluation in Athletic Training survey consisted of respondents' demographic characteristics and Likert-scale items regarding clinical proficiency evaluation methods and barriers, educational content areas, and clinical experience settings. We used analyses of variance and independent t tests to assess differences among athletic training education program characteristics and the barriers, methods, content areas, and settings regarding clinical proficiency evaluation.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 3 methods investigated, simulations (n = 191, 95.0%) were the most prevalent method of clinical proficiency evaluation. An independent-samples t test revealed that more opportunities existed for real-time evaluations in the college or high school athletic training room (t(189) = 2.866, P = .037) than in other settings. Orthopaedic clinical examination and diagnosis (4.37 +/- 0.826) and therapeutic modalities (4.36 +/- 0.738) content areas were scored the highest in sufficient opportunities for real-time clinical proficiency evaluations. An inadequate volume of injuries or conditions (3.99 +/- 1.033) and injury/condition occurrence not coinciding with the clinical proficiency assessment timetable (4.06 +/- 0.995) were barriers to real-time evaluation. One-way analyses of variance revealed no difference between athletic training education program characteristics and the opportunities for and barriers to real-time evaluations among the various clinical experience settings.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  No one primary barrier hindered real-time clinical proficiency evaluation. To determine athletic training students' clinical proficiency for entry-level employment, athletic training education programs must incorporate standardized patients or take a disciplined approach to using simulation for instruction and evaluation.
authors.affiliation: Ball State University, School of Physical Education, Sport and Exercise Science, Muncie, IN 47306, USA. sewalker@bsu.edu
authors.forename: Stacy E
authors.initials: SE
authors.lastname: Walker
authors.forename: Thomas G
authors.initials: TG
authors.lastname: Weidner
authors.forename: Kirk J
authors.initials: KJ
authors.lastname: Armstrong
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004522:Educational Status; D005260:Female; D017144:Focus Groups; D006801:Humans; D007196:Indiana; D008297:Male; D010806:Physical Education and Training; D011361:Professional Competence; D013334:Students; D000078329:Workforce