The value which research brings to health and wellbeing is unquestioned. Without it, progress in diagnosis, treatment and care would probably cease and the service offered to patients and clients would deteriorate. Engaging student radiographers, and radiographers who are early in their careers, with the research agenda is important as it is this group of people particularly who could go on to make meaningful career-long contributions to the radiographic knowledge base and clinical practice advancements. The radiography profession continues to suffer from a lack of engagement in research and because of this, in 2012, a multi-national collaboration was established to create a residential summer school in order to provide a real research experience to inspire participants to value research and/or carry out research as part of their career. The summer school is called OPTIMAX and it is primarily aimed at BSc student radiographers. MSc students and newly qualified radiographers are welcome to participate; also, university tutors are also welcome too as they can gain greatly from it. For doctoral (e.g. PhD) qualified radiographers, attending OPTIMAX could be a good steppingstone in a post-doctoral career as it offers a good experience in team working in research. It is worth remembering that a doctoral qualification is solely intended to develop research abilities and the research career should start on the day the doctoral qualification is acquired. Sadly, for many individuals within radiography, the day the doctoral qualification is attained is the day research stops. OPTIMAX therefore offers an opportunity to a wide range of people, to inspire and help them gain skills, confidence and insight into how research can be conducted in teams and disseminated for the benefit of others.
DOCUMENT
INTRODUCTION: To facilitate various transitions of medical residents, healthcare team members and departments may employ various organizational socialization strategies, including formal and informal onboarding methods. However, residents' preferences for these organizational socialization strategies to ease their transition can vary. This study identifies patterns (viewpoints) in these preferences.METHODS: Using Q-methodology, we asked a purposeful sample of early-career residents to rank a set of statements into a quasi-normal distributed grid. Statements were based on previous qualitative interviews and organizational socialization theory. Participants responded to the question, 'What are your preferences regarding strategies other health care professionals, departments, or hospitals should use to optimize your next transition?' Participants then explained their sorting choices in a post-sort questionnaire. We identified different viewpoints based on by-person (inverted) factor analysis and Varimax rotation. We interpreted the viewpoints using distinguishing and consensus statements, enriched by residents' comments.RESULTS: Fifty-one residents ranked 42 statements, among whom 36 residents displayed four distinct viewpoints: Dependent residents (n = 10) favored a task-oriented approach, clear guidance, and formal colleague relationships; Social Capitalizing residents (n = 9) preferred structure in the onboarding period and informal workplace social interactions; Autonomous residents (n = 12) prioritized a loosely structured onboarding period, independence, responsibility, and informal social interactions; and Development-oriented residents (n = 5) desired a balanced onboarding period that allowed independence, exploration, and development.DISCUSSION: This identification of four viewpoints highlights the inadequacy of one-size-fits-all approaches to resident transition. Healthcare professionals and departments should tailor their socialization strategies to residents' preferences for support, structure, and formal/informal social interaction.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: High-velocity low-amplitude thrust spinal manipulation (SM) is a recommended and commonly used manual therapy intervention in physiotherapy. Beliefs surrounding the safety and effectiveness of SM have challenged its use, and even advocated for its abandonment. Our study aimed to investigate the knowledge and beliefs surrounding SM by Italian physiotherapists compared with similar practitioners in other countries.METHODS: An online survey with 41 questions was adapted from previous surveys and was distributed via a mailing list of the Italian Physiotherapists Association (March 22-26, 2020). The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections to capture information on participant demographics, utilization, potential barriers, and knowledge about SM. Questions were differentiated between spinal regions. Attitudes towards different spinal regions, attributes associated with beliefs, and the influence of previous educational background were each evaluated.RESULTS: Of the 7398 registered physiotherapists, 575 (7.8%) completed the survey and were included for analysis. The majority of respondents perceived SM as safe and effective when applied to the thoracic (74.1%) and lumbar (72.2%) spines; whereas, a smaller proportion viewed SM to the upper cervical spine (56.8%) as safe and effective. Respondents reported they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with upper cervical SM (respectively, 27.5% and 48.5%) compared to the thoracic (respectively, 52.2% and 74.8%) and lumbar spines (respectively, 46.3% and 74.3%). Most physiotherapists (70.4%) agreed they would perform additional screening prior to upper cervical SM compared to other spinal regions. Respondents who were aware of clinical prediction rules were more likely to report being comfortable with SM (OR 2.38-3.69) and to perceive it as safe (OR 1.75-3.12). Finally, physiotherapists without musculoskeletal specialization, especially those with a traditional manual therapy background, were more likely to perform additional screening prior to SM, use SM less frequently, report being less comfortable performing SM, and report upper cervical SM as less safe (p < 0.001).DISCUSSION: The beliefs and attitudes of physiotherapists surrounding the use of SM are significantly different when comparing the upper cervical spine to other spinal regions. An educational background in traditional manual therapy significantly influences beliefs and attitudes. We propose an updated framework on evidence-based SM.
DOCUMENT
