Differences in current approaches to respiratory physiotherapy student practice education across Europe

Background: Practice education is an important part of physiotherapy education curricula and it is usually organised by universities as a clinical practice placement involving patient care in different settings. Currently, there are no guidelines to indicate the structure, content or length of placement specifically in respiratory physiotherapy. Thus, there may be various models used in respiratory physiotherapy education. Hitherto, there is little known about practice education in respiratory physiotherapy across Europe.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate and describe current approaches to student practice education in respiratory physiotherapy across Europe.
Methods: The group of academics across Europe responsible for respiratory physiotherapy education were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. Participants were selected purposively for the study from the professional network and from the European Respiratory Society physiotherapy group. Data were analysed using SPSS Version…
Results: Nineteen academics from18 European countries were invited to participate in the study. Response rate was 84% with completed data from 15 participants. There were differences in duration of the course for physiotherapy qualification (2- 5 years). In most countries, students will entry the course after secondary education and at the end will be awarded Higher National Diploma (12%), Bachelor degree (81%) or/and Master degree (44%). Practice education is compulsory in all European physiotherapy curriculums, but number of practice hours significantly vary between universities (240- 3200 hrs). Most students will have hands-on-practice supervised practice (80%), but 20% will have only observational, no hands-on experience. Only 5 (33%) universities offered practice experience in respiratory physiotherapy to all students and 5 (33%) universities will offer respiratory experience to less than 25% of students. Only 4 (27%) universities has predefined hours in respiratory physiotherapy practice education. Also, there are differences in areas covered by this practice. For instance, the most covered topic is breathing techniques with 11 (73%) responders said is compulsory and 4 (27%) that optional. Also, chest clearance is compulsory in 10 (66%) countries y and optional in 5 (33%). Only 9 (60%) responders indicated that patient assessment is compulsory, 5 (33%) that is optional and 1 (6%) that is not covered. The areas which were consider least compulsory were: Non-invasive ventilation, abdominal surgery, Intensive Care Unit, paediatrics. Student assessment of respiratory practice was reported by 10 (66%) of participants with only 7 (47%) receiving mark or grade for their respiratory physiotherapy practice assessment.

Conclusions: There is a wide variety of practises in practice education of respiratory physiotherapy. Not all physiotherapy students in Europe have a chance to experience and learn about respiratory physiotherapy in practice. Further differences concern content and assessment methods. There is a very little harmonisation of requirements for respiratory physiotherapy practice education.

Implications: This study highlights the lack of harmonisation of respiratory physiotherapy practice education, which may impact on physiotherapy safe practice across borders and lack of specialists in this area of physiotherapy. There is a need for future enhanced provision of respiratory practice education to all physiotherapy students in Europe