A Randomized Trial Comparing Blended Learning Versus Face-to-face Learning in Cardiac Physiotherapy Students
A Randomized Trial Comparing Blended Learning Versus Face-to-face Learning in Cardiac Physiotherapy Students
Blended learning (BL) combines both face-to-face learning (FL) and online learning. There is no evidence about the effects of a BL program in cardiac physiotherapy education. This study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of a BL program versus a FL program in Physiotherapy Degree students on knowledge, competencies, satisfaction, perceptions, usability, BL acceptance, attitudes and behaviours. An assessor-blinded randomized trial was performed.
Blended learning (BL) combines both face-to-face learning (FL) and online learning. There is no evidence about the effects of a BL program in cardiac physiotherapy education. This study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of a BL program versus a FL program in Physiotherapy Degree students on knowledge, competencies, satisfaction, perceptions, usability, BL acceptance, attitudes and behaviours. An assessor-blinded randomized trial was performed. A total of 100 students were randomly allocated to a BL group (BLG, n=48), or a FL group (FLG, n=52). The BLG received face-to-face classes plus online re-sources (online syllabus, Moodle, scientific-based videos and websites, activities, glossary, and apps). The FLG received face-to-face classes and hardcopy resources (hardcopy syl-labus, scientific-based information, activities, and glossary). Knowledge, ethical and gen-der competencies, satisfaction, and perceptions were assessed pre- and post-intervention. Usability, BL acceptance, attitudes and behaviours were assessed post-intervention.
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria: