Association between professional commitment and self-reported perceived clinical competence among undergraduate operating room and anesthesia technology students: a cross-sectional correlational study

Abstract Introduction Professional commitment and perceived clinical competence are vital for healthcare students. However, evidence regarding their simultaneous relationship among allied health students in high-stakes perioperative environments remains limited. This study investigated this association among undergraduate Operating Room and Anesthesia Technology students. Methods In this cross-sectional correlational study (2025), all eligible undergraduate students in the predefined study population were invited to participate. Of 180 eligible students, 150 participated (response rate: 83.3%). Data were collected during May 15, 2025 to October 22, 2025. Data were collected via demographic, Meyer and Allen Professional Commitment, and Perceived Clinical Competence questionnaires. Multiple linear regression (Enter method) was used to examine variables independently associated with self-reported perceived clinical competence, with assumptions of normality, homoscedasticity, and multicollinearity verified. Results Mean professional commitment was 61.3 ± 9.8, and mean self-reported perceived clinical competence was 168.7 ± 24.3. A moderate-to-strong positive correlation existed between total professional commitment and self-reported perceived clinical competence ( r = 0.63, p < 0.001). Multiple linear regression indicated that total professional commitment (β = 0.48, 95% CI [0.87, 1.51], p < 0.001), interest in the field (β = 0.22, 95% CI [2.28, 11.10], p = 0.003), and GPA (β = 0.18, 95% CI [0.69, 5.55], p = 0.012) were independently associated with self-reported perceived clinical competence, accounting for 49.3% of the observed variance in this sample (R² = 0.493). Conclusion Professional commitment, academic interest, and GPA were independently associated with self-reported perceived clinical competence in this sample. Because of the cross-sectional design and self-reported measurement of the primary variables, these findings should be interpreted as associations rather than causal effects. The findings may inform future educational research and hypothesis generation.