Simulated versus traditional occupational therapy placements: A randomised controlled trial.

Area of Science:

• Occupational therapy education
• Allied health professional training
• Simulation-based learning

Background:

• Professional practice placements are crucial for occupational therapy graduate competence.
• Australian accreditation standards permit up to 200 hours of simulation-based learning within the 1000-hour placement requirement.
• Evidence comparing simulation-based placements to traditional placements in occupational therapy is limited.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate if a 40-hour Simulated Clinical Placement (SCP) yields non-inferior learning outcomes compared to a 40-hour Traditional Clinical Placement (TCP).
• To assess the effectiveness of simulation in occupational therapy education.

Main Methods:

• A pragmatic, non-inferiority, assessor-blinded, multicentre randomised controlled trial was conducted across six Australian universities.
• 570 students were randomised 1:1 to either SCP or TCP in vocational rehabilitation, mental health, or physical rehabilitation settings.
• Outcomes were measured via standardized examination, unit grades, Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised, and student confidence surveys, analyzed using generalized estimating equations.

Main Results:

• No significant differences were found between SCP and TCP in examination results (P=0.087), unit scores (P=0.066), or placement fail rates (100% pass rate in both groups).
• A total of 540 students (94.7% retention) completed the study.
• The study achieved its sample size target for statistical power analysis.

Conclusions:

• Occupational therapy students can attain equivalent learning outcomes through a 40-hour simulated placement as through a 40-hour traditional placement.
• These findings support the integration of simulation-based learning in occupational therapy education.
• The study provides assurance to students, educators, and accreditation bodies regarding the efficacy of simulation.