Wheelchair skills training for occupational therapy students: comparison of university-course versus “boot-camp” approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To test the hypothesis that occupational therapy students who receive wheelchair skills training education using a distributed-practice university-course approach versus a condensed-practice boot-camp approach results in greater improvements post-intervention in relevant outcomes.Design: A quasi-experimental, nonequivalent control group design.Setting: A university occupational therapy program.Participants: Occupational therapy students (experimental group) and recent occupational therapy graduates (control group) (N = 58).Interventions: A 15-week, 45-hour wheelchair provision course in which a total of 24 hours were dedicated to wheelchair skills testing and training education (experimental group) versus an 8-hour wheelchair skills training boot-camp (control group).Main outcome measures: Assessments were conducted pre- and post-intervention using the Wheelchair Skills Test Questionnaire (WST-Q), Wheelchair Use Confidence Scale for Manual Wheelchair Users (WheelCon) and Self-Efficacy on Assessing, Training and Spotting wheelchair skills (SEATS).Results: Compared to baseline, the WST-Q, WheelCon and SEATS scores improved significantly for both groups (p < .001). There were no significant differences in change scores (post-intervention – baseline values) between the groups for WST-Q, WheelCon or SEATS scores, however, the experimental group demonstrated a trend (p < .051) of higher scores for all outcome measures.Conclusions: Occupational therapy students who received wheelchair skills training using either a distributed-practice university-course or condensed-practice boot-camp approach demonstrated significant post-training improvements in their WST-Q, WheelCon and SEATS scores, but no significant differences were found between groups.Implications for RehabilitationBoth a distributed-practice university-course approach and a condensed-practice bootcamp approach for training wheelchair skills to occupational therapy students results in large post-intervention improvements in wheelchair skill, wheelchair confidence and self-efficacy to test, train, spot and document wheelchair skills.The pre-education (optional course) wheelchair skill, wheelchair confidence and self-efficacy to test, train, spot and document wheelchair skills scores found in this cohort of occupational therapy students confirms the need to include this wheelchair content in mandatory occupational therapy curricula.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".