A Pilot Survey of Pediatric Occupational and Physical Therapy Providers' Confidence, Attitudes, Barriers, and Education Regarding Trauma-Informed Care.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Jessica Barreca, Ashley Wagner
{"title":"A Pilot Survey of Pediatric Occupational and Physical Therapy Providers' Confidence, Attitudes, Barriers, and Education Regarding Trauma-Informed Care.","authors":"Jessica Barreca, Ashley Wagner","doi":"10.1080/01942638.2024.2360457","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Trauma-informed care (TIC) is a strengths-based organizational approach which recognizes the prevalence and impact of trauma on an individual's neurological, sensorimotor, and emotional responses and development. There is limited research on pediatric occupational therapy providers' (OTPs) and physical therapy providers' (PTPs) perceptions on incorporating TIC into their practice. This pilot study aims to describe the confidence, attitudes, barriers, and education of pediatric OTPs and PTPs regarding TIC.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>OTPs and PTPs (<i>n</i> = 87) working in pediatric settings in the U.S. completed an electronic survey regarding their perceptions of TIC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>OTPs reported higher confidence in TIC compared to PTPs. Most participants reported favorable attitudes toward TIC, yet no statistical significance was identified between the two professions' overall attitudes toward TIC. Collectively, participants reported lack of time and training as barriers. There was a statistically significant difference between how the two professions rated competency, training, and concern over clients' retraumatization. There was significant association between years of professional experience and TIC education.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Preliminary findings indicate an overall agreement of OTPs and PTPs with principles of TIC and common barriers to TIC practice. There are implications to further integrate opportunities for TIC training into foundational education and professional practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":49138,"journal":{"name":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"765-782"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2024.2360457","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Trauma-informed care (TIC) is a strengths-based organizational approach which recognizes the prevalence and impact of trauma on an individual's neurological, sensorimotor, and emotional responses and development. There is limited research on pediatric occupational therapy providers' (OTPs) and physical therapy providers' (PTPs) perceptions on incorporating TIC into their practice. This pilot study aims to describe the confidence, attitudes, barriers, and education of pediatric OTPs and PTPs regarding TIC.

Method: OTPs and PTPs (n = 87) working in pediatric settings in the U.S. completed an electronic survey regarding their perceptions of TIC.

Results: OTPs reported higher confidence in TIC compared to PTPs. Most participants reported favorable attitudes toward TIC, yet no statistical significance was identified between the two professions' overall attitudes toward TIC. Collectively, participants reported lack of time and training as barriers. There was a statistically significant difference between how the two professions rated competency, training, and concern over clients' retraumatization. There was significant association between years of professional experience and TIC education.

Conclusion: Preliminary findings indicate an overall agreement of OTPs and PTPs with principles of TIC and common barriers to TIC practice. There are implications to further integrate opportunities for TIC training into foundational education and professional practice.

儿科职业和物理治疗师对创伤知情护理的信心、态度、障碍和教育试点调查。
目的:创伤知情护理(TIC)是一种基于优势的组织方法,它认识到创伤的普遍性及其对个人神经、感觉运动和情绪反应及发展的影响。关于儿科职业治疗提供者(OTPs)和物理治疗提供者(PTPs)对将 TIC 纳入其实践的看法的研究十分有限。本试验性研究旨在描述儿科职业治疗师和物理治疗师对 TIC 的信心、态度、障碍和教育:方法:在美国儿科机构工作的手术医生和门诊医生(n = 87)完成了一项关于他们对 TIC 的看法的电子调查:结果:与 PTP 相比,OTP 对 TIC 的信心更高。大多数参与者表示对 TIC 持赞成态度,但两种职业对 TIC 的总体态度之间没有统计学意义。总的来说,参与者认为缺乏时间和培训是障碍。两种职业对能力、培训和对客户再创伤的担忧的评价在统计学上有显著差异。专业经验年限与创伤信息中心教育之间存在明显关联:初步研究结果表明,开放型创伤治疗师和专业创伤治疗师总体上认同创伤治疗与康复的原则,但也存在创伤治疗与康复实践中的共同障碍。在基础教育和专业实践中进一步纳入 TIC 培训机会具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: 5 issues per year Abstracted and/or indexed in: AMED; British Library Inside; Child Development Abstracts; CINAHL; Contents Pages in Education; EBSCO; Education Research Abstracts (ERA); Education Resources Information Center (ERIC); EMCARE; Excerpta Medica/EMBASE; Family and Society Studies Worldwide; Family Index Database; Google Scholar; HaPI Database; HINARI; Index Copernicus; Intute; JournalSeek; MANTIS; MEDLINE; NewJour; OCLC; OTDBASE; OT SEARCH; Otseeker; PEDro; ProQuest; PsycINFO; PSYCLINE; PubsHub; PubMed; REHABDATA; SCOPUS; SIRC; Social Work Abstracts; Speical Educational Needs Abstracts; SwetsWise; Zetoc (British Library); Science Citation Index Expanded (also known as SciSearch®); Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition; Social Sciences Citation Index®; Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition; Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences; Current Contents®/Clinical Medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信