Speak Out June 2020

• Telerehabilitation Clinics: Adverse Event Flowchart; • Tele rehabilitation Clinics: Preparing to Work from Home Student Checklist; • Tele rehabilitation Clinics: CE and CM Supervision Checklist; • Online training modules. Future directions UQ are continuing to plan for implementation of synchronous remote supervision for final year UG students in semester 2 and will explore concurrent sessions for these placements. Tele rehabilitation clinical placements using these models of supervision will continue throughout 2020. References Chipchase, L., et al. (2014). Evaluating tele supervision as a support for clinical learning: an action research project. International Journal of Practice-based Learning in Health and Social Care, 2, 1-14. Laughran, L., & Sackett, J. (2015). Telesupervision and ASHA’s tasks of supervision. ASHA Wire , 5(1), 4-13. Martin, P., Lizarondo, L., & Kumar, S. (2018). A systematic review of the factors that influence the quality and effectiveness of telesupervision for health professionals. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 24(4), 271-281. McAllister, L., & Nagarajin, S. (2015). Accreditation requirements in allied health education: Strengths, weaknesses and missed opportunities. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 6(1), 2-24. Nagarajn, S. et al., (2016). Telesupervision benefits for placements: Allied health students’ and supervisors’ perceptions. International Journal of Practice-based Learning in Health and Social Care , 4(1), 16-27. Nagarajn, S. et al., (2018). Recommendations for effective tele- supervision of allied health students on placements. Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech Language Pathology , 20(1), 21-25. Speech Pathology Australia. (2014). Position statement: Tele- practice in speech pathology. Melbourne: Speech Pathology Australia. Speech Pathology Australia. (2018). Clinical education in Aus- tralia: Building a profession for the future. Melbourne: Speech Pathology Australia.

Response Each speech pathology student clinic was evaluated in relation to the following risk mitigation framework: • Year level of the students and suitability for synchronous remote supervision; • Prior placement experience of the students; • Experience of the CEs with tele rehabilitation; • Suitability of the clients for telerehabilitation. Based on this, the following clinical placement models were developed: 1. Alternative clinical experiences. This opportunity was provided for 3rd year UG and 1st year GEMS students. a. CEs delivered sessions to clients via tele rehabilitation; b. Sessions were recorded and shared with students via secure UQ platforms; c. Students completed structured observation, progress note writing, session planning, and case discussion in regular clinical placement meetings. 2.Synchronous, remote supervision . This opportunity was provided for final year GEMS students whose external placement had been cancelled. a. Students in a paired model delivered sessions to clients from their own homes; b. Students received 1:1 remote supervision from a CE who observed the session in real-time from their own home. Through implementation of each of the above models, we were able to support continuation or commencement of clinical placement for international and remote domestic students who had returned home. Overall, between 70 to 100% of students who had a planned clinical placement in semester 1 across different cohorts were able to complete these placements. Resources developed To support both CEs and students in the rapid transition to tele rehabilitation within new clinical placement models, the following are examples of just some of the many training and education resources developed or provided: • Tele rehabilitation Clinics: Zoom Instructions; • Zoom User Guides(UQ); • Delivering Tele rehabilitation Services from Home; • Tele rehabilitation Clinics: Students and CE Top Tips and Troubleshooting;

19

June 2020 www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au

Speak Out