↓ Skip to main content

Peyton’s four-step approach for teaching complex spinal manipulation techniques – a prospective randomized trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Peyton’s four-step approach for teaching complex spinal manipulation techniques – a prospective randomized trial
Published in
BMC Medical Education, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0804-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gertraud Gradl-Dietsch, Cavan Lübke, Klemens Horst, Melanie Simon, Ali Modabber, Tolga T. Sönmez, Ralf Münker, Sven Nebelung, Matthias Knobe

Abstract

The objectives of this prospective randomized trial were to assess the impact of Peyton's four-step approach on the acquisition of complex psychomotor skills and to examine the influence of gender on learning outcomes. We randomly assigned 95 third to fifth year medical students to an intervention group which received instructions according to Peyton (PG) or a control group, which received conventional teaching (CG). Both groups attended four sessions on the principles of manual therapy and specific manipulative and diagnostic techniques for the spine. We assessed differences in theoretical knowledge (multiple choice (MC) exam) and practical skills (Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE)) with respect to type of intervention and gender. Participants took a second OSPE 6 months after completion of the course. There were no differences between groups with respect to the MC exam. Students in the PG group scored significantly higher in the OSPE. Gender had no additional impact. Results of the second OSPE showed a significant decline in competency regardless of gender and type of intervention. Peyton's approach is superior to standard instruction for teaching complex spinal manipulation skills regardless of gender. Skills retention was equally low for both techniques.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 130 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Master 16 12%
Researcher 11 8%
Lecturer 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 28 22%
Unknown 39 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 18%
Psychology 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 39 30%