The "How" and "Why" Behind Clinical Site Visits: A Qualitative Study Exploring Director of Clinical Education Perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have investigated stakeholder perspectives regarding clinical site visits (SVs). An SV is one of the many ways of building strong relationships through collaborative communication. This study explored perceptions of directors of clinical education (DCEs) about why SVs are important, why they prefer certain methods of communication over others, and how they prioritize their decision-making process regarding structure and communication methods used. LITERATURE REVIEW: Barriers to conducting SVs exist, including scheduling challenges, time, and cost. Some studies suggest preferences for using in-person communication. SUBJECTS: Fifteen DCEs from across the United States. METHODS: Subjects participated in one-on-one semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using a grounded theory approach and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Six themes emerged from the data: (1) communication is vital, (2) SVs are fact-finding missions that serve multiple purposes, (3) flexibility is essential, (4) showing up in person has a strong impact, (5) DCEs strategically schedule in-person SVs, and (6) faculty assistance can be valuable. Some of the purposes of an SV include learning about the clinic's expectations, gathering data to ensure that the student is having a good experience, keeping current with curricular trends and contemporary practice, and building and nurturing relationships. Faculty may be able to assist in conducting SVs when properly trained. In-person SVs show a powerful message of support to students and clinicians. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Similar to other stakeholders, DCEs value SVs for building, maintaining, and strengthening clinical and academic relationships. Site visits also bridge curricular gaps, support stakeholders, and help DCEs do their job. Directors of clinical education are strategic when considering SV structure, communication methods, and prioritizing student and clinician needs. Results were used in conjunction with prior findings of our mixed-methods explanatory sequential study to create recommendations, which will empower DCEs to advocate for resources to continue conducting SVs, particularly in-person SVs, especially under certain circumstances. Future research should explore clinician perspectives, specifically related to preferred communication methods, structure of the SV, and meeting with faculty other than the DCE.

Duke Scholars

Author Jamie Lynn Greco Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Therapy