Exploring the affordances of e-learning technologies for dietetics education and training

No Abstrac

Academics’ knowledge and experiences of interprofessional education and practice

BACKGROUND. Interprofessional education (IPE) can be seen as the vehicle to address the health and social problems of society through collaborative approaches. Since IPE should be facilitated by educators who are skilled in this area, faculty development initiatives should be based on the principles of IPE and collaborative practice (IPECP). OBJECTIVE. To explore academics’ knowledge and experiences of IPECP. METHODS. The study used an exploratory descriptive design and the appreciative inquiry framework underpinned data gathering and analysis. The data were collected using workshops, and the participants of the workshops shared their knowledge and experiences of IPECP, which were audio-recorded and analysed using thematic analysis. Ethical clearance was obtained from the University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa. RESULTS. The analysis revealed three themes: knowledge of IPE; experiences of IPECP; and enablers of IPECP aligned to the dream and discovery phases of appreciative inquiry. The findings revealed that academics were knowledgeable about the concept of IPE and that their experiences with IPECP ranged from clinical supervision to research. Regarding enablers of IPECP, they provided important input, which could facilitate IPECP in a university faculty. These included competencies for IPECP, professional development and a common practice framework. CONCLUSION. The academics who attended the faculty development workshops were knowledgeable about the concepts of IPECP. They concluded that for IPE to be effective, a common practice framework should be adopted in the faculty to inform specific teaching and learning strategies and outcomes.DHE

Determinants of the Use of a Diabetes Risk-Screening Test

A study was designed to investigate why people do or do not make use of a diabetes risk test developed to facilitate the timely diagnosis of diabetes. Data were collected using a web-based questionnaire, which was based on the Health Belief Model, the Theory of Planned Behavior, and the Threatening Medical Situations Inventory. People who had and had not used the risk test were recruited to complete the survey. The sample consisted of 205 respondents: 44% who had used the test and 56% who had not. The hypothesized relationships between the dependent variable (diabetes risk test use) and the determinants used in this study were tested using logistic regression analysis. Only two significant predictors of diabetes risk test use were found: gender and barriers. More women than men use the test. Furthermore, people who experience more barriers will be less inclined to use the test. The contribution of diabetes screening tests fully depends on people’s willingness to use them. To optimize the usage of such test, it is especially important to address the barriers as perceived by the public. Two types of barriers must be addressed: practical barriers (time to take the test, fear of complexity of the test), and consequential barriers (fear of the disease and treatment, uncertainties about where to go in the case of an increased risk of diabetes)

PERFORMANCE OF MVIC DOES NOT ENHANCE ACCURACY OF NEUROMUSCULAR FUNCTION AT SUBMAXIMAL INTENSITIES

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of neuromuscular function at submaximal intensities of perceived maximal voluntary isometric contractions (MVIC) pre- and post-MVIC. METHODS: Thirteen healthy females and 15 males were recruited to participate in this study. Subjects were asked to visit the lab for a single visit in which they were seated on a bench with their elbows fixed at 90⁰ of elbow flexion. Subjects were asked to perform 3 submaximal isometric contractions (SVIC) of bilateral elbow flexion at 25, 50, and 75% of their perceived MVIC strength. Force and muscle excitation of the dominant biceps brachii were recorded via a load cell and surface electromyography (EMG), respectively. Following completion of the SVICs, subjects performed 2 MVICs, each separated by 1 minute of rest. Subjects then repeated the same sequence of SVICs after MVIC testing. Peak force (PF) and EMG amplitude (EMGAMP) were calculated during a 500ms window of each contraction where PF occurred. Normalized percent error for EMGAMP (nEMGERROR) and PF (nPFERROR) were calculated by subtracting the normalized EMGAMP and PF (relative to MVIC) from the target intensity (i.e., 25/50/75% MVIC). Separate time (pre/post) × intensity (25/50/75%) × sex (M/F) repeated measures ANOVAs were run for each variable and alpha was set a-priori at 0.05. RESULTS: There were no interaction effects for either dependent variable (p=0.158-0.798). However, there was a significant main effect for intensity for nEMGERROR and nPFERROR (p\u3c0.001 for both). Post-hoc analysis indicated that nEMGERROR and nPFERROR at 25% (nEMGERROR: 11.7±16.4%; nPFERROR: 12.7±-14.8%) was significantly greater than 50% (nEMGERROR: -0.5±17.7%; nPFERROR: -0.6 ±16.5%; p\u3c0.001 for both) and 75% (nEMGERROR: -13.2 ± 17.4%; nPFERROR: -14.0±15.9%; p\u3c0.001 for both), when collapsed across time and sex. Additionally, nEMGERROR and nPFERROR at 50% were significantly greater than 75% (p\u3c0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that performing an MVIC attempt does not enhance one’s ability to accurately estimate submaximal force. Additionally, subjects consistently underestimated 25% effort, overestimated 75% effort, and slightly underestimated 50% effort. Our data suggests that this phenomenon occurs independent of sex, as similar error patterns of muscle excitation and peak force were seen between males and females across all intensities. FUNDING: This project was funded by the University of South Alabama’s Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship and Bukstein Fellowship