 |
MS Degree Research Faces Challenges
By Edward S. Neumann, PhD, PE, CP The new masters programs in O&P create both an
opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity lies in the
requirement that students in the programs must undertake and
complete a research thesis in order to graduate. At last, there is
an opportunity for conducting research on
O&P!
 However, before we jump to the conclusion that the
masters programs automatically will enable the profession to move
to higher levels of knowledge and competence, we should examine
some challenges, which lie in the research requirement:
- Is there a mechanism in place to define the research problems
of greatest relevance to clinical practice?
- What research methods and tools are most appropriate?
- Will students be prepared adequately through classroom
experiences to apply these methods and tools?
Defining What's Needed
With respect to the first question, there currently is no
mechanism within the profession to develop statements of research
needs. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) attempts to define
needs, but the VA is a closed shop. One has to be a VA employee to
direct VA-funded research, and administrative decision-makers, not
necessarily clinicians, set priorities. Other federal agencies such
as the Department of Education and the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) have competitive funding programs, but do not
themselves generate statements of O&P research needs. Reviewers
of proposals submitted to these entities who have clinical
experience in O&P are rare. Students in the new masters
programs (as well as researchers seeking federal grants, who might
be faculty in the programs) could benefit from the development of a
set of good research problem statements.
Appropriate Methods, Tools
The second issue, concerning appropriate research methods and
tools, has been largely overlooked. O&P research faces unique
problems that have yet to be fully appreciated by those who have or
plan to undertake studies. Major barriers to the development of
conclusive studies that utilize the types of traditional
experimental methods that medicine labels as "gold standards" are
1) it is difficult in O&P to recruit a sufficient number of
subjects to facilitate general conclusions, and 2) it is difficult
to control for a myriad of confounding variables such as age,
pathology, and type of components. The variability inherent in
human movement and physiologic response seems to become magnified
when examining O&P outcomes. Statistical tools such as
bootstrapping and small-group and single-subject methods have been
developed recently that might help to address these problems. What
is found eventually to be appropriate and feasible for O&P
clinical research may look very different from traditional
experimental methods that require very large sample sizes. There is
a critical need to identify research methods appropriate to the
constraints of the O&P environment.
Curriculum Design
Both the first and second issues impact the third issue,
curriculum design. To conduct research that has value in the
clinic, students need to be provided both the proper research tools
and a sense of research needs in specific areas. A masters program
should not simply replace a bachelors program, but should surpass
it in many ways, most notably in research competencies. To
accomplish this, it may be necessary to upgrade curriculum
requirements for quantitative skills, among others. For the
graduates of the programs, the enhanced analytic skills will form
the basis for the development of improved pattern recognition
skills, which will evolve during clinical experience subsequent to
graduation.
The graduate from an ideal masters program should be at least as
competent to understand and direct O&P research as the physical
therapists, physicians, and engineers who have been the lead
authors on a large number of O&P research articles published
during the last 20 years. If the profession can attain this level
of expertise via masters-level programs, its long-term survival may
no longer be questioned. I have identified some major challenges
that must be overcome to reach this new plateau, but the rewards
will be worth the effort.
Edward S. Neumann, PhD, PE, CP, is professor of civil and
environmental engineering at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas;
director of the Center for Disability and Applied Biomechanics; and
adjunct professor of biomedical engineering as well as
kinesiology. He has developed and taught courses in orthopedic
biomechanics, human motion analysis, prosthetic systems
engineering, assistive technology, and ergonomics. 
Table Of Contents - October 2005
|
|
