%0 Journal Article
%@ 2369-3762
%I JMIR Publications
%V 8
%N 1
%P e31634
%T Comparing Web-Based and In-Person Educational Workshops for Canadian Occupational Therapists and Understanding Their Learning Experiences: Mixed Methods Study
%A Kim,Sungha
%A Bayer,Ilana
%A Gewurtz,Rebecca
%A Larivière,Nadine
%A Letts,Lori
%+ School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada, 1 289 659 7787, kims130@mcmaster.ca
%K online education
%K occupational therapy
%K occupational therapist
%K continuing education
%D 2022
%7 4.1.2022
%9 Original Paper
%J JMIR Med Educ
%G English
%X Background: The Do-Live-Well (DLW) framework is an occupation-focused health promotion approach. Occupational therapists (OTs) have been interested in training opportunities regarding this framework. Traditionally, in-person continuing educational interventions are the main way that OTs obtain knowledge, but web-based learning has become popular among health care professionals. However, its effectiveness and learners’ experience in web-based learning have not been well-studied in occupational therapy education. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the web-based and in-person educational DLW workshops for Canadian OTs and to understand their experiences in both workshop types. Methods: An explanatory sequential mixed methods study design was used, where quantitative data were collected first, then qualitative data were used to explain the quantitative findings. A quasi-experimental design and interpretative description methodology were used in the quantitative and qualitative phases, respectively. Results: Quantitative results were as follows: a total of 43 OTs completed pre-, post-, and follow-up evaluations (in-person group: 21/43, 49%; web-based group: 22/43, 51%). Practice settings of the participants varied, including geriatric, hospital, long-term, mental health, pediatric, and primary settings. The primary outcome was as follows: there were no statistically significant differences in knowledge changes at the 3 time points (P=.57 to P=.99) between the groups. In the web-based group, the knowledge scores at follow-up were lower compared with the posttest results, meaning that knowledge gain was reduced over time (P=.001). The secondary outcomes were as follows: there were statistically significant differences between the groups in factors influencing DLW adoption at posttest (P=.001) and in satisfaction with the workshop (P<.001) at posttest in favor of the in-person group. Qualitative results were as follows: a total of 18 OTs (9/18, 50% from each group) participated in an individual interview. Five themes were identified regarding learners’ workshop experiences: relevance to their practices and interests may improve learning, a familiar learning environment may facilitate learning, synchronous in-person interaction is valuable in the learning process, ease of access to learning should be considered, and flexibility in web-based learning can be both beneficial and challenging. Conclusions: The quantitative results of this study reported no difference in knowledge acquisition between the in-person and web-based groups, indicating that web-based education is as effective as in-person workshops. However, participants’ satisfaction with the workshop was statistically significantly higher for the in-person workshop. The qualitative findings described the participants’ perceived benefits and challenges of each educational format. The participants in both the web-based and in-person workshop groups valued in-person interactions in learning, but the participants in the web-based workshop group expressed web-based learning lacked in-person-like interactions. Thus, adding synchronous in-person interactions to web-based learning may improve learners’ educational experiences in web-based occupational therapy and continuing education. 
%M 34982719
%R 10.2196/31634
%U https://mededu.jmir.org/2022/1/e31634
%U https://doi.org/10.2196/31634
%U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34982719