Curriculum Development and Implementation for Adapting to Emerging Trends in the Professional Training and Practice of Exercise Scientists for Sustainable National Orthopaedics Development.
CHAPTER ONE
Objectives of the Study
This study sought to achieve three specific objectives:
- To analyze the current state of professional training for exercise scientists in the context of orthopaedics and identify areas that require adaptation to address emerging trends.
- To design an innovative curriculum that aligns with the evolving needs of orthopaedic care and is sustainable for the long-term development of national orthopaedics.
- To assess the implementation of the newly developed curriculum and its impact on the training of exercise scientists in the field of orthopaedics.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Conceptual Review
Orthopaedics Development
Orthopaedics, as a critical component of healthcare, has evolved significantly over the years (Glasser, 2018). A historical examination reveals that it began as a speciality focused on correcting musculoskeletal deformities and injuries through surgical means (Aidar et al., 2017). However, in the modern context, orthopaedics encompasses a broader scope, including non-surgical interventions like rehabilitation and exercise science (Flansbjer et al., 2022). The historical transition underscores the need for training programs that adapt to these changing roles.
Historical Perspective
Historically, orthopaedic care is mainly centred around correcting skeletal abnormalities through surgical interventions. This approach has evolved with time and expanded to address various musculoskeletal conditions, including stroke survivors’ gait impairments (Cuviello-Palmer, 2018). Early practices focused on surgical techniques, but today, an interdisciplinary approach is employed, involving professionals like exercise scientists to facilitate recovery (Dean et al., 2020). This historical shift emphasizes the importance of a contemporary curriculum that equips exercise scientists with the knowledge and skills to meet current orthopaedic challenges.
Current Trends and Challenges in Orthopaedics
Current orthopaedic trends emphasize holistic and patient-centered care, leveraging technological innovations and community-based models (Galvin et al., 2022). These trends are driven by the need for improved outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction (Globas et al., 2022). However, the field faces challenges like integrating technology effectively into rehabilitation (Bale & Strand, 2018) and engaging communities in the rehabilitation process (Mudge et al., 2017). Exercise scientists need to be prepared to address these challenges, underscoring the necessity of a curriculum that reflects contemporary orthopaedic care demands.
Role of Exercise Scientists in Orthopaedics
The role of exercise scientists in orthopaedics is multifaceted and vital (Ada et al., 2021). Exercise scientists are responsible for designing and implementing tailored exercise programs aimed at improving the musculoskeletal health and overall well-being of patients. They assess individuals’ physical conditions and develop personalized exercise regimens to address their specific needs (Lim et al., 2020). These regimens often encompass activities aimed at increasing strength, endurance, and mobility (Flansbjer et al., 2018). Furthermore, exercise scientists also play a crucial role in patient education, promoting adherence to prescribed exercise routines and lifestyle changes (Inaba et al., 2021).
Exercise scientists have a significant impact on the field of orthopaedics (Galvin et al., 2022). Their specialized knowledge and skills contribute to the rehabilitation and recovery of patients with musculoskeletal disorders. By providing evidence-based exercise interventions, they aid in restoring and improving patients’ mobility and functionality (Kim et al., 2022). Their involvement can lead to better patient outcomes, reducing the burden on the healthcare system by decreasing the need for surgical interventions (Smith & Thompson, 2018). Additionally, exercise scientists are pivotal in promoting prevention strategies, emphasizing the importance of physical activity in maintaining musculoskeletal health (Rose et al., 2021).
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The methodology chapter of this study provides an overview of the research design and approach adopted to investigate the objectives of this research. The chapter discusses various aspects of the research process, including the research design, population and sample, data collection methods, data analysis, validity, reliability, and ethical considerations. The choice of methodology is vital in determining the effectiveness and rigour of the study (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2016).
Research Design
The research design for this study is quantitative. Quantitative research is particularly suitable for exploring trends, relationships, and patterns in large datasets (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Given the need to examine a broad population of 1,200 respondents, a quantitative survey research design was deemed appropriate for this study. This research design facilitates the efficient collection of data from a significant number of respondents and allows for a comprehensive analysis of the findings. Quantitative research enables the development of a broader understanding of the relationship between the variables under investigation. In this case, it allows us to examine the influence of exercise scientist training on the evolving landscape of orthopaedic care. The use of this research design was justified due to its capacity to provide reliable, replicable, and generalizable findings (Anderson, Fontinha, & Robson, 2020).
Population of the Study
The target population for this study consists of exercise scientists and professionals in the field of orthopaedic care. This choice is justified by the focus of this research on the knowledge and skills required by exercise scientists to address emerging trends in orthopaedic care. The population’s selection aligns with the research objectives and ensures that the findings are relevant to the context under investigation. The study aims to explore the perspectives, experiences, and practices of exercise scientists within the context of sustainable national orthopaedics development (Yin, 2018). Therefore, the choice of this population is integral to achieving a comprehensive understanding of the research problem and answering the research questions effectively.
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Data Presentation
Table 4.1 presents the distribution of the questionnaire about its completion status. Out of the total 120 questionnaires distributed to respondents, 104 were returned and completed, indicating a response rate of 86.7%. Conversely, 16 questionnaires were not returned or were returned incomplete, accounting for 13.3% of the total. This response rate is notable, as it demonstrates a relatively high level of engagement from the respondents. The high response rate is a positive indicator of the willingness of the participants to contribute to the study, suggesting that the research topic resonates with them or that they understand the importance of the research findings.
The significant response rate is crucial in ensuring that the data collected accurately represents the perspectives of exercise scientists in this study. However, it’s important to acknowledge that the 13.3% of unreturned or incomplete questionnaires should not be overlooked, as they may contain valuable insights or offer different perspectives. To enhance the robustness of the study, efforts should be made to explore the reasons for non-completion or non-return of questionnaires. This could include follow-up communications with those participants to understand any challenges they may have encountered. In summary, the high response rate, while positive, should be analyzed in conjunction with the small percentage of unreturned or incomplete questionnaires to ensure the research accurately reflects the diverse views of exercise scientists regarding the role of technology in orthopaedic rehabilitation and the need for their training in this area.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of Findings
This study aimed to investigate various aspects of exercise scientist training and its alignment with emerging trends in orthopaedic care, as well as their potential role in promoting sustainable national orthopaedic development. A questionnaire-based survey was conducted, targeting 120 respondents with a background in healthcare and orthopaedics, and the data were analyzed to draw meaningful insights. The summary of findings is divided into several sections for clarity and comprehensiveness.
The findings from Tables 4.1 to 4.5 provided valuable insights into the respondents’ backgrounds and familiarity with orthopaedic care. The majority of the respondents had some level of familiarity with orthopaedic care, and a significant number of them or their family members had been recipients of orthopaedic care. This information suggests that the respondents were well-placed to provide informed opinions on the topics covered in the questionnaire.
The results from Tables 4.7 to 4.10 highlighted the respondents’ opinions on the significance of specific elements in exercise scientist training and curriculum. Notably, the majority of respondents strongly agreed or agreed that exercise scientists should have a strong foundation in musculoskeletal anatomy and physiology (67.3%) and be trained in the latest technological advancements (73.1%). This indicates a strong consensus on the importance of these elements in ensuring the effectiveness of exercise scientists in orthopaedic care.
Moreover, respondents widely agreed that exercise scientists should receive specialized training in personalized rehabilitation techniques (68.3%). This underscores the recognition of the need for tailored treatment approaches in orthopaedic care to improve patient outcomes. This consensus on the importance of training elements suggests that there is a clear demand for curricula to address these aspects.
The findings from Tables 4.11 to 4.13 explored the respondents’ perspectives on the need for updated curricula in exercise scientist training. The results were overwhelmingly in favor of updating curricula to align with advancements in orthopaedic care and to incorporate coursework on integrating technology in orthopaedic rehabilitation. For instance, 77.3% either strongly agreed or agreed that curricula should be updated to align with orthopaedic care advancements. Likewise, 67.3% of respondents supported the inclusion of technology integration coursework in exercise scientist training programs. These results emphasize the importance of keeping training programs current and relevant to address the evolving landscape of orthopaedic care.
Tables 4.14 and 4.15 delved into the respondents’ views on community-based care models and the importance of personalized rehabilitation. The findings suggested a widespread consensus regarding the significance of these elements. For example, 72.1% of respondents either strongly agreed or agreed that exercise scientists should prioritize tailoring treatment to individual patient needs to improve the quality of care. Additionally, 84.6% either strongly agreed or agreed that exercise scientists should actively engage in technology integration to bridge existing gaps in care practices. These results indicate that the respondents recognized the potential of exercise scientists in community-based care and personalized rehabilitation, further underscoring the need for their training in these areas.
Overall Conclusion
In summary, this study has provided valuable insights into the perceptions and needs of exercise scientists in the context of orthopaedic care, as well as their role in addressing emerging trends and promoting sustainable national orthopaedic development. The findings suggest a strong consensus among respondents regarding the importance of various aspects of exercise scientist training, including musculoskeletal anatomy and physiology, technological advancements, personalized rehabilitation, community-based care models, and technology integration. This collective agreement indicates a clear demand for curricula that address these aspects.
The results also support the need for updated curricula that align with advancements in orthopaedic care, as well as the integration of technology in orthopaedic rehabilitation. Furthermore, the data underscore the significance of personalized rehabilitation and community-based care models, emphasizing the potential for exercise scientists to play an essential role in these domains. These findings can guide educational institutions, policymakers, and healthcare organizations in tailoring training programs to better equip exercise scientists for the evolving landscape of orthopaedic care.
Conclusion
Based on the results of the hypotheses tested, it is evident that the current professional training of exercise scientists in the field of orthopaedics indeed faces significant gaps and challenges in addressing emerging trends. The rejection of the null hypotheses in Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3 signifies that innovative curricula aligned with emerging needs of orthopaedic care can significantly promote sustainable national orthopaedic development and positively impact the training and practice of exercise scientists in orthopaedics. These findings underline the pressing need for educational institutions and policymakers to revamp training programs for exercise scientists.
By recognizing the importance of musculoskeletal anatomy and physiology, technological advancements, personalized rehabilitation, community-based care models, and technology integration in orthopaedic care, it is possible to tailor curricula to equip exercise scientists with the essential knowledge and skills to thrive in this evolving field. The rejection of Hypothesis 1 further underscores the necessity of adapting training programs to address the emerging trends and challenges faced by exercise scientists in orthopaedics.
In summary, the results of this study emphasize the critical role that well-designed curricula play in the professional development of exercise scientists. The findings encourage a more comprehensive and adaptive approach to training, ensuring that exercise scientists are better prepared to address the changing landscape of orthopaedic care and ultimately contribute to the sustainable development of national orthopaedics.
Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, the following recommendations are proposed:
- Revise Curricula for Exercise Scientist Training: Educational institutions offering programs for exercise scientists should consider a thorough review and revision of their curricula. This revision should prioritize incorporating in-depth training in musculoskeletal anatomy and physiology, technological advancements, personalized rehabilitation, and technology integration in orthopaedic care.
- Continuous Professional Development: Exercise scientists should be encouraged to engage in continuous professional development to stay updated with the evolving trends in orthopaedic care. Attending workshops, seminars, and online courses on musculoskeletal anatomy and the latest technological advancements can help bridge the knowledge gap.
- Integration of Technology in Training: Exercise scientist training programs should actively incorporate coursework on integrating technology in orthopaedic rehabilitation. This integration should include practical experience in using the latest tools and technologies relevant to the field.
- Collaboration with Healthcare Institutions: Educational institutions should foster collaboration with healthcare organizations to offer hands-on training experiences for their students. These partnerships can expose students to real-world orthopaedic care, allowing them to witness the practical application of their knowledge.
Contribution to Knowledge
This study offers several valuable contributions to the field of orthopaedic care and exercise science.
First and foremost, it emphasizes the need for advanced training standards for exercise scientists in orthopaedics. By identifying significant gaps in the existing training curricula, the research underscores the importance of integrating musculoskeletal anatomy and physiology into the education of future exercise scientists. This contribution advances the knowledge in the field by promoting more comprehensive and up-to-date training programs that can better equip exercise scientists to address the evolving trends in orthopaedic care.
Lastly, the research underscores the importance of collaboration between educational institutions and healthcare organizations. By advocating for partnerships that offer students practical experience and real-world exposure to orthopaedic care, it contributes to knowledge by promoting a hands-on approach to learning. Such collaboration can enhance students’ skills and competencies, ensuring they are better prepared for the challenges and demands of their future roles.
References
- Ada, L., Dean, C. M., & Lindley, R. (2021). Randomized trial of treadmill training to improve walking in community‐dwelling people after stroke: the AMBULATE trial. International Journal of Stroke, 8(6), 436‐44.
- Aidar, F. J., Matos, D. G., Oliveira, R. J., Carneiro, A. L., Cabral, B. G. de A. T., Dantas, P. M. S., et al. (2020). Relationship between depression and strength training in survivors of ischemic stroke. Journal of Human Kinetics, 43, 7‐15.
- Aidar, F. J., Oliveira, R. J., Silva, A. J., Matos, D. G., Mazini Filho, M. L., Hickner, R. C., et al. (2022). The influence of resistance exercise training on the levels of anxiety in ischemic stroke. Stroke Research and Treatment, 2022, 298‐375.
- Aidar, F. J., Silva, A. J., Reis, V. M., Carneiro, A., & Carneiro‐Cotta, S. (2017). A study on the quality of life in ischaemic vascular accidents and its relation to physical activity [Estudio de la calidad de vida en el accidente vascular isquémico y su relación con la actividad física]. Revista de Neurología, 45, 518‐22.
- Anderson, V., Fontinha, R., & Robson, F. (2020). Research Methods in Human Resource Management: Investigating a Business Issue. 4th Ed. London: CIPD.
- Bale, M., & Strand, L. I. (2018). Does functional strength training of the leg in subacute stroke improve physical performance? A pilot randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation, 22(10‐11), 911‐21.
- Bandura, A. (2007). Social Learning Theory. Prentice-Hall.
- Bateman, A., Culpan, F. J., Pickering, A. D., Powell, J. H., Scott, O. M., & Greenwood, R. J. (2021). The effect of aerobic training on rehabilitation outcomes after recent severe brain injury: a randomized controlled evaluation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 82(2), 174‐82.
