The following is an introduction to the design, execution, and resulting of dual surveys completed to gain insight into the practice, value, and future of clinical education. This will be presented in the coming months as part of a multipart series.

Clinical educators in the diagnostic laboratory professions play a crucial role in shaping the competence of future healthcare professionals. Recently, members of the medical laboratory science program at Austin Peay State University, in concert with student members of the program, designed, executed, and analyzed a study of how clinical education is performed and how its value can be determined. This study presents findings from two distinct surveys: one focused on clinical educators and the other on the opinions of recent student graduates of various diagnostic laboratory programs. A total of 207 clinical educators responded to the survey, with 158 of those responding to the questions related to this research. There were 177 respondents to the student survey, with both surveys being deployed on a national platform.

Results from the clinical educator survey revealed that 87% of participants do not receive any incentive for their role. Many correlations were drawn between variables in the study, including a drawing of a relationship between years of experience as a clinical educator and incentives received. An analysis of these data indicated no significant relationship between most hospital types and incentives, except for critical access hospitals.

The majority of student participants recommend monetary compensation as a means of incentive for their clinical educators. Results from the recent graduate survey showed that 84% of participants believe clinical educators should be compensated, with a significant relationship between positive clinical experiences and recommending monetary compensation, recognition, continuing education (CE), and paid time off.

This study provides valuable insights into the current state of incentives for clinical educators, emphasizing the need for comprehensive support systems to enhance the quality of clinical education in medical laboratory science. The findings contribute to ongoing discussions on addressing disparities and challenges in sustaining effective incentive programs for clinical educators.

Study Development

Clinical educators play an essential role in educating students in healthcare-related programs. Professions such as medical laboratory science, radiologic technology, nursing, nutrition, physical therapy, and many other fields of medicine are dependent on practitioners in their respective fields to help guide students through clinical education experiences. This has become even more important as staffing shortages have increased the demand for qualified healthcare practitioners, as well as placed undue burden on those providers who have remained.

Clinical preceptors are working healthcare professionals who volunteer to supervise students while students apply their education in a real-world setting. According to one study, “These clinical experiences are vital for the development of clinical reasoning and problem-solving skills required of a competent healthcare provider.”¹ As the student is not yet proficient, they must be closely supervised by a practitioner in the field. The preceptor has the responsibility to oversee the student’s actions, maintain patient safety, and maintain compliance with the facility’s standards. An additional study states that preceptors “function as expert clinicians, coaches, mentors, educators, and evaluators.”² Initially, clinical educators who volunteer for their roles, may be motivated by the desire to teach and guide new professionals in the field. From the same study, “Although precepting is challenging, evidence indicates intrinsic precepting motives include fulfilling a passion for teaching students, meeting a sense of duty to precept, and ensuring updated clinical knowledge and skills.”²

Most commonly, clinical educators are working professionals who are filling this role as an additional responsibility. Unfortunately, clinical educators note several barriers to their role, including lack of compensation, limited use of electronic medical records, time constraints, decreased productivity, and feeling unprepared or unqualified to teach or evaluate student performance. In light of staffing shortages throughout healthcare, facilities also may be reluctant to host students, reasons for which include lack of resources, strict productivity standards, substantial workload, and lack of professional behavior demonstrated by students.¹ Likewise, preceptors who were surveyed in a separate study report that an increase in workload demands and lack of recognition are barriers for precepting in the nutritional professions.³

However, students can be a valuable resource to the clinical organizations in which they are completing their rotations. They can provide information about current trends in the profession, enthusiasm, and a different and fresher perspective.¹ They also provide the organization with recruitment benefits. Organizations can save resources normally spent on advertising, interviewing, onboarding, and training new employees when they hire students who have completed clinical rotations at their facility.¹

Introducing Incentives

As demonstrated by our study, along with current research literature, less than 15% of clinical educators in the laboratory profession receive any type of incentive for their role. Some healthcare organizations do provide benefits or compensation for clinical preceptorships. Similarly, in nurse practitioner training programs, academic partners have typically offered incentives to preceptors in the form of access to academic libraries, adjunct faculty status, and certificates of appreciation.⁴ To support nursing education preceptors, who are otherwise uncompensated, some states have enacted tax incentive legislation.²

There is some debate surrounding financial compensation offered by the educational institutions to clinical sites or clinical preceptors. Typically, schools that can offer financial incentives are private, for-profit institutions, which may give them an undue advantage over state schools and community colleges. Furthermore, “the practice of paying preceptors is unsustainable for educational institutions that provide affordable healthcare education.”¹

As clinical education constitutes a foundational aspect of the learning journey for individuals entering the healthcare workforce, it is crucial for educational institutions to retain, maintain, and attract clinical sites and proficient clinical preceptors. This article series will explore these issues to determine if training programs in medical laboratory science are currently offering incentives to clinical preceptors, and which incentives serve as strong motivators. We will evaluate both monetary and nonmonetary incentives, including continuing education credits necessary for licensure renewal, tuition reimbursement, faculty appointments, paid time off, and professional recognition, among others.

Survey Breakdown

Our research team crafted and conducted two validated surveys in which respondents participated using an electronic platform that was delivered via an email distribution system provided by the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP). The first survey focused on actively practicing laboratory professionals who also serve as clinical educators.

The second survey focused on students who had graduated from a laboratory professional program within the previous year. Each survey was deployed separately with greater than 12 months in between each deployment. As each survey was released, screening questions were used to identify the target participants, thereby excluding individuals who did not meet the established criteria. Participants were asked to respond to survey questions with a combination of answers, such as open-ended, multiple choice, and multiple response. In terms of data analysis, the study employed descriptive statistics and Chi Square (X²) analysis with a significance level (p-value) of 0.05. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Austin Peay State University (APSU) approved the deployment of both surveys and the research that followed.

Survey Objectives

The primary objective of this project is to ascertain whether clinical educators in the laboratory profession receive incentives for their role as a clinical educator. Laboratory professional students were surveyed to determine whether clinical educators were deserving of incentives for their role. The study results reveal the nature of the rewards and incentives being considered while also exploring educators’ interest in earning continuing education credits for their role. Clinical educators with experience in clinical laboratories sharing their experience with students will remain critical to future laboratory science success.

Further details on each individual survey and the collective results will be published in the coming issues of MedicalLab Management.

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the following people for their assistance in this project: Shelly R. Latchem, MS, MLS(ASCP), Timothy A. Catalano, MA, RT(T), and Oghenetega Adogbeji.

References

1. Lewis M, Gleeson PB, Wilkinson T, et al. Part 1. Payment for clinical education experiences: A historical Perspective. JOPTE. 2021;35(4):286-293.
2. Heuer B, Zeno R, Woosley C, et al. NAPNAP Position statement on incentivizing advanced practice registered nurse preceptors. National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners. JPEDHC. 2023;85-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2023.01.003
3. Hutchins AM, Winham DM, Fellows JP, Heer MM. Training interns in nutrition and dietetics: A cross-sectional study of the barriers and motivators to being a registered dietitian nutritionist preceptor. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):277.
4. Morgan M, Brewer M, Buchhalter F, et al. Sustaining regional preceptor partnerships: Preceptor incentive survey. J Nurse Prac. 2018;14(1):e1-e4.

Heather L. Phillips, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM, MT(AMT), is a professor in the medical laboratory science program at Austin Peay State University (APSU) in Clarksville, Tennessee. In addition to her faculty role, she has also serves as the director of APSUs diagnostic laboratory. Heather is a past president of the American Society of Clinical Laboratory Science of Tennessee (ASCLS-TN), and has authored nine peer-reviewed publications, one of which earned her a distinguished author award.

Teresa O. Crutcher, MA, RT(R), is a clinical coordinator and professor of radiography at APSU, where she combines her expertise in radiologic sciences with a passion for community service. Currently, her research focuses on developing strategies to identify breast cancer in underserved populations who lack the financial resources for screening, striving to make life-saving diagnostic tools accessible to all.

Eleanor K. Jator, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM, is a professor in the MLS program at APSU, where she also serves as clinical coordinator of the MLS and phlebotomy programs. She holds a PhD in health and human services with a concentration in healthcare administration from Capella University, Minnesota, and earned both a BS and a MS in microbiology from the University of Ilorin in Ilorin, Nigeria. Eleanor holds an additional master’s degree in health and human performance with a concentration in health services administration and a certificate in medical technology from APSU.

For Further Reading

Cultivating Qualified Laboratory Professionals
Andrea Grey, MLS(AMT), HT(ASCP)
medlabmag.com/article/2070

Improve TAT Between the Lab and the ED
Dan Chen, PhD, DABCC, Agnieszka Zuber, MT, MS, and Zenieda Mohamed, MT
medlabmag.com/article/2051

Advantages of Lab Participation in Clinical Rounds
Tyler Radke, MLS(ASCP)
medlabmag.com/article/2044

Engage the Laboratory Team for Improved Performance
Stephne Miller
medlabmag.com/article/2026

Properly Assign New Technology to Workload
Stephne Miller
medlabmag.com/article/2001

Streamline Hematology Technology to Offset Staff Shortages
Lisa J. Veri, BS, MLS(ASCP)CM
medlabmag.com/article/1985