Search

Objective: The purpose of this study was to explore how physical therapists use movement as a component of their clinical reasoning. Additionally, this research explored whether movement as a component of clinical reasoning aligns with the proposed signature pedagogy for physical therapist education, human body as teacher., Methods: The study utilized qualitative, descriptive methods in a multiple case studies design (each practice setting represented a different case for analysis purposes) with cross-case comparisons. Researchers conducted 8 focus groups across practice settings including acute care, inpatient neurological, outpatient orthopedics, and pediatrics. Each focus group had 4 to 6 participants. Through an iterative, interactive process of coding and discussion among all researchers, a final coding scheme was developed., Results: Through exploration of the research aims, 3 themes emerged from the data. These primary themes are: (1) movement drives clinical reasoning to optimize function; (2) reasoning about movement is multisensory and embodied; and (3) reasoning about movement relies on communication., Conclusions: This research supports a description of movement as the lens used by physical therapists in clinical reasoning and the integral role of movement in clinical reasoning and in learning from and through movement of the human body while learning from clinical reasoning experiences in practice., Impact: As the understanding of the ways physical therapists use and learn from movement in clinical reasoning and practice continues to emerge, it is important to continue exploring ways to best make this expanded, embodied conception of clinical reasoning explicit in the education of future generations of physical therapists., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Physical Therapy Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Physical therapy, along with most health professions, struggles to describe clinical reasoning, despite it being a vital skill in effective patient care. This lack of a unified conceptualization of clinical reasoning leads to variable and inconsistent teaching, assessment, and research., Objective: The objective was to conceptualize a broad description of physical therapists' clinical reasoning grounded in the published literature and to unify understanding for future work related to teaching, assessment, and research., Design/methods: The design included a systematic concept analysis using Rodgers' evolutionary methodology. A concept analysis is a research methodology in which a concept's characteristics and the relation between features of the concept are clarified., Results: Based on findings in the literature, clinical reasoning in physical therapy was conceptualized as integrating cognitive, psychomotor, and affective skills. It is contextual in nature and involves both therapist and client perspectives. It is adaptive, iterative, and collaborative with the intended outcome being a biopsychosocial approach to patient/client management., Limitations: Although a comprehensive approach was intended, it is possible that the search methods or reduction of the literature were incomplete or key sources were mistakenly excluded., Conclusions: A description of clinical reasoning in physical therapy was conceptualized, as it currently exists in representative literature. The intent is for it to contribute to the unification of an understanding of how clinical reasoning has been conceptualized to date by practitioners, academicians, and clinical educators. Substantial work remains to further develop the concept of clinical reasoning for physical therapy, including the role of movement in our reasoning in practice., (© 2018 American Physical Therapy Association.)

Unlabelled: The aim of this study was to evaluate the construct validity of the Health Science Reasoning Test (HSRT) by determining if the test could discriminate between expert and novice physical therapists' critical-thinking skills., Methods: Experts identified from a random list of certified clinical specialists and students in the first year of their physical therapy education from two physical therapy programs completed the HSRT., Results: Experts (n = 73) had a higher total HSRT score (mean 24.06, SD 3.92) than the novices (n = 79) (mean 22.49, SD 3.2), with the difference being statistically significant t (148) = 2.67, p = 0.008., Conclusion: The HSRT total score discriminated between expert and novice critical-thinking skills, therefore establishing construct validity. To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare expert and novice performance on a standardized test. The opportunity to have a tool that provides evidence of students' critical thinking skills could be helpful for educators and students. The test results could aid in identifying areas of students' strengths and weaknesses, thereby enabling targeted remediation to improve critical thinking skills, which are key factors in clinical reasoning, a necessary skill for effective physical therapy practice.