Parkinson's Disease Mini-Boot Camp: A Brief, Intense Experiential Learning Module
Purpose/Hypothesis:
Persons with Parkinson’s Disease (PWP) are frequently referred to PT for management of their movement problems. Recent research supports that physically intensive, targeted training programs are effective at improving mobility in PWP.1-5
Varied instructional methods may be employed by PT programs to cover management of Parkinson’s Disease (PD), and experiential learning theory suggests that experience, active engagement, experimentation and reflection play a pivotal role in students’ application of learning.6,7
The purpose of this study was to determine if an experiential Parkinson’s Disease Mini-Boot Camp (PDBC) embedded within a physical therapy curriculum contributed to improvements in students’ knowledge, confidence and attitudes towards working with PWP.
Number of Subjects:
Seventy-five, third-year physical therapy doctoral students participated in the PDBC.
Materials and Methods:
This mixed methods study involved a two-day PDBC that was developed as a component of a geriatrics course within a DPT curriculum. Prior to the PDBC, students received four hours of instruction related to PD specific movement problems and evidence-based interventions. PWP were recruited from the community and engaged in six hours of supervised, individualized exercise over two days, with a student to participant ratio of 2:1 or 3:1. The PDBC concluded with a 30-minute reflective de-brief session led by the course instructors.
Students completed a survey before and after the PDBC, with questions pertaining to students’ confidence and attitudes about working with PWP. A knowledge assessment was also embedded within the pre and post-Boot Camp surveys. Open ended responses were categorized using qualitative open coding. Effect size (Cohen's d [95% confidence intervals]) was tabulated for survey questions that used likert scale responses.
Results:
52% students reported having prior experience working with PWP. Knowledge assessments conducted pre and post PDBC showed that 30.7% and 63.7% students, respectively, accurately described a PD specific treatment intervention.
Survey questions using likert scales showed significant increase in students' confidence (d=-0.66 [-0.86, -0.46]) and knowledge (d= -0.42 [-0.58, -0.25]) when comparing pre and post PDBC responses. Survey responses related to students’ interest in working with PWP showed no significant effect.
Two themes emerged from qualitative survey data that focused on students’ positive perceptions about PDBC; they valued working directly with PWP and also appreciated the challenge of developing and adapting treatment interventions for individual participants. Suggestions for improvement were primarily oriented towards timing issues, such as increasing the number of days of the PDBC, and scheduling the PDBC learning module earlier in the semester.
Conclusions:
A PDBC embedded into a geriatrics course was associated with improvements in students’ confidence in working with PWP as well as their understanding of appropriate interventions for PWP.
Clinical Relevance:
This work, in conjunction with previously published work6 helps to build our understanding of the effectiveness of experiential learning in physical therapy education.