A comparison of practice analysis findings using two different informant groups.

摘要

Background. A practice analysis is conducted to determine the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to perform competently in a profession and serves as the blueprint for board examinations. Practice analysis informant groups can vary ranging from a handful of subject matter experts (SMEs) to a large field sample of practitioners. These variations open some professional organizations to criticism.; Purpose. The purposes of this research were to compare the competency ratings between a field group and a SME group and to complete a practice analysis in aquatic physical therapy.; Methods. Three groups of physical therapists were utilized for this study. The first SME group created the competency statements that constituted the basic items for the practice analysis survey. The survey was then sent to another SME group and a field sample for rating. Two rounds of a Delphi process were completed within each group in an attempt to achieve consensus. The results from each group were compared to determine whether the competency recommendations achieved consensus agreement (both study groups failing to reach consensus or both reaching consensus at the same two adjacent scores) or outcome agreement (both study groups agreeing that the item should be included, eliminated or subject to further review).; Results. Following the first Delphi round, consensus was achieved on 82% of the items within each group and consensus agreement was reached on 140 of the 174 (80%) competencies. Following round two, each informant group achieved consensus on 172 of the 174 (99%) of the items. Consensus agreement was achieved on 152 of the 174 (87%) of the competencies, and outcome agreement was achieved on 154 of the 174 (88%) of the competencies.; Conclusions. The two informant groups achieved high levels of both consensus agreement and outcome agreement. For this professional organization, using either a field sample or a SME group would have produced comparable practice profiles. Other factors such as cost, time, political influences and the professional organization's expectations for membership participation should also be considered when choosing the informant group selection methodology.