Background: Clinical performance assessment tools (CPATs) used in physiotherapy practice
education need to be psychometrically sound and appropriate for use in all clinical settings in
order to provide an accurate reflection of a student's readiness for clinical practice. Current
evidence to support the use of existing assessment tools is inconsistent.
Objectives: To conduct a systematic review synthesising evidence relating to the
psychometric and edumetric properties of CPATS used in physiotherapy practice education.
Data Sources: An electronic search of Web of Science, SCOPUS, Academic Search
Complete, AMED, Biomedical Reference Collection, British Education Index, CINAHL
plus, Education Full Text, ERIC, General Science Full Text, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, UK
and Ireland Reference Centre databases was conducted identifying English language papers
published in this subject area from 1985 to 2015.
Study selection: Twenty papers were identified representing fourteen assessment tools.
Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers evaluated selected papers using a validated
framework (Swing et al., 2009).
Results: Evidence of psychometric testing was inconsistent and varied in quality. Reporting
of edumetric properties was unpredictable in spite of its importance in busy clinical
environments. No Class 1 recommendation was made for any of the CPATs, and no CPAT
scored higher than Level C evidence.
Conclusions: Findings demonstrate poor reporting of psychometric and edumetric properties
of CPATs reviewed. A more robust approach is required when designing CPATs.
Collaborative endeavour within the physiotherapy profession and interprofessionally may be
key to further developments in this area and may help strengthen the rigour of such
assessment processes.
History
Publication
Physiotherapy;104 (1), pp. 46-53
Publisher
Elsevier
Note
peer-reviewed
Rights
This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Physiotherapy. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Physiotherapy, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2017.01.005