Comparing Immersive and Nonimmersive Clinical Experiences in Athletic Training Education: Effects on Student Engagement and Confidence

Context With the shift to a graduate-level professional degree in athletic training, it was hypothesized that immersive clinical experiences (ICEs) would be more effectively integrated into curricula than non-ICEs (N-ICEs) and better prepare students for practice. Objective To longitudinally compare clinical engagement opportunities in ICEs versus N-ICEs and assess if these opportunities are associated with changes in student confidence in performing related tasks. Design Prospective, longitudinal, time-diary study using a Web-based survey. Patients or Other Participants Fifty-three first-year, master’s-level athletic training students from 21 programs. Main Outcome Measure(s) Participants reported their type of clinical experience (ICE, N-ICE, or none), the setting, and hours spent at clinical each day. They quantified the percentage of time spent on 8 categories of athletic training and patient care tasks and rated their confidence in performing these tasks. Independent samples t tests ( P < .05) were used to compare confidence ratings and time spent on activities across all students, and the analysis was repeated within students who participated in both ICEs and N-ICEs. Results Most clinical experiences occurred in traditional athletic training settings. Immersive clinical experiences led to more time spent on administrative tasks, waiting, and therapeutic interventions, while N-ICEs involved more time in practice coverage, skills practice, diagnostic labs or tests, and applying protective devices. Within students, N-ICEs showed more time on skills practice, but other outcomes were not significant. Immersive clinical experiences resulted in higher confidence in integrating business practices and communicating with health providers and administrators. Conclusions Immersive clinical experiences may offer more engagement opportunities and increase confidence in specific tasks, while engagement opportunities are influenced more by the student than the type of clinical experience. Both ICEs and N-ICEs have valuable roles in clinical education; each providing different types of engagement opportunities.