Radiography
Volume 14, Issue 3 , Pages 226-232, August 2008

Preparedness for clinical practice – Perceptions of graduates and their work supervisors

  • S.J. Mackay

      Affiliations

    • School of Health Care Professions, Allerton Building, University of Salford, Manchester M6 6PU, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 0161 295 2157.
  • ,
  • A.C. Anderson

      Affiliations

    • Tameside General Hospital, Fountain Street, Lancashire, UK
  • ,
  • P. Hogg

      Affiliations

    • School of Health Care Professions, Allerton Building, University of Salford, Manchester M6 6PU, UK

Received 20 October 2006; received in revised form 15 March 2007; accepted 3 May 2007.

Abstract 

Purpose

The standards of performance of healthcare professionals are now well defined and used to determine health professional curricula. Empirical research evidence exists in medicine and nursing which explores how well these curricula prepare their students for clinical practice but not in the radiography profession. This research aims to determine how well prepared newly qualified radiographers were for clinical practice and to identify strengths and weaknesses in their preparedness to inform curriculum development.

Methods

A postal questionnaire and semi-structured interview were used to obtain data from newly qualified diagnostic radiographers and their work-based supervisors. The questionnaire assessed graduate preparedness against a number of items drawn from published documents which define UK radiographic practice. Statistical analysis, using ANOVA and Wilcoxon, examined differences between the groups’ perception of preparedness. A sample of graduates and their work supervisors were interviewed to explore preparedness.

Results

There were significant differences (p0.05) between; the preparedness scores of the graduates and supervisors, with supervisors rating the graduates higher than the graduates themselves; subscales of teamwork (p0.05), personal attributes (p0.05) and digital skills (p0.01). No significant differences were found between graduates employed in their training hospital and those employed elsewhere. Interview data revealed perceived areas of graduate strength, weaknesses and areas for curriculum development. Suggestions for improvement to the methodology were identified for exploring preparedness in other health professional programmes.

Conclusion

The graduates were well prepared for their role as a diagnostic radiographer. Some curriculum development is needed in specific areas and advice on methodological improvement is offered.

Keywords: Preparedness, Graduate, Competence, Clinical practice, Fitness for practice, Radiography

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1078-8174(07)00041-7

doi:10.1016/j.radi.2007.05.001

Radiography
Volume 14, Issue 3 , Pages 226-232, August 2008