Are occupational therapists in hand therapy working in an occupation-centered way? A cross sectional survey.

IF 0.9 Q4 REHABILITATION
Hand Therapy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-28 DOI:10.1177/17589983241268188
Thea Birch Ransby, Nicolaj Schøler Jacobsen, Alice Ørts Hansen
{"title":"Are occupational therapists in hand therapy working in an occupation-centered way? A cross sectional survey.","authors":"Thea Birch Ransby, Nicolaj Schøler Jacobsen, Alice Ørts Hansen","doi":"10.1177/17589983241268188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The dominance of the biomedical approach has previously caused a limited focus on occupation within hand therapy. This study aimed to investigate the rehabilitation offered to patients with a hand-related disorder (HRD) in Denmark including to determine the extent to which occupation-focused and/or occupation-based assessments and interventions are used and to identify barriers against their use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey with 45 questions was conducted among members of the Danish Association for Hand Therapy. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics. Categorical variables were reported with frequency and percentage, and continuous variables with average and standard deviation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and six occupational therapists working as hand therapists (<i>n</i> = 106) completed the survey. They reported common use of assessments measuring range of motion, pain, edema, and occupational performance. Occupational performance was assessed by non-standardized occupation-focused assessments, such as informal conversations. Exercise, pain management, and occupation-focused informal conversations were reported as the most frequently used interventions. Out of 82 respondents, 74 (91.4%) reported that they used interventions focused on body function and structures to the extent they wanted. Only 41 (50.0%) used occupation-focused or occupation-based interventions to the extent they wanted.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Assessments and interventions reporting body function and structure were used most frequently whereas assessments and interventions reporting activity and participation were used to a lesser extent. Occupation-focused assessments and interventions were used more commonly than occupation-based. Hand therapists considered occupation-based assessments and interventions to be important in rehabilitation after HRD, despite using them with few patients. Several barriers were reported regarding the implementation of an occupation-centered approach: habit, workload, time constraints, and setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":43971,"journal":{"name":"Hand Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378532/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hand Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17589983241268188","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The dominance of the biomedical approach has previously caused a limited focus on occupation within hand therapy. This study aimed to investigate the rehabilitation offered to patients with a hand-related disorder (HRD) in Denmark including to determine the extent to which occupation-focused and/or occupation-based assessments and interventions are used and to identify barriers against their use.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey with 45 questions was conducted among members of the Danish Association for Hand Therapy. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics. Categorical variables were reported with frequency and percentage, and continuous variables with average and standard deviation.

Results: One hundred and six occupational therapists working as hand therapists (n = 106) completed the survey. They reported common use of assessments measuring range of motion, pain, edema, and occupational performance. Occupational performance was assessed by non-standardized occupation-focused assessments, such as informal conversations. Exercise, pain management, and occupation-focused informal conversations were reported as the most frequently used interventions. Out of 82 respondents, 74 (91.4%) reported that they used interventions focused on body function and structures to the extent they wanted. Only 41 (50.0%) used occupation-focused or occupation-based interventions to the extent they wanted.

Discussion: Assessments and interventions reporting body function and structure were used most frequently whereas assessments and interventions reporting activity and participation were used to a lesser extent. Occupation-focused assessments and interventions were used more commonly than occupation-based. Hand therapists considered occupation-based assessments and interventions to be important in rehabilitation after HRD, despite using them with few patients. Several barriers were reported regarding the implementation of an occupation-centered approach: habit, workload, time constraints, and setting.

手部治疗的职业治疗师是否以职业为中心开展工作?一项横断面调查。
简介生物医学方法的主导地位曾导致手部治疗中对职业的关注有限。本研究旨在调查丹麦为手部相关疾病(HRD)患者提供的康复治疗,包括确定以职业为重点和/或以职业为基础的评估和干预措施的使用程度,并找出其使用障碍:方法:对丹麦手部治疗协会的成员进行了一项横向调查,共45个问题。数据采用描述性统计进行分析。分类变量用频率和百分比表示,连续变量用平均值和标准偏差表示:166 名从事手部治疗的职业治疗师(n = 106)完成了调查。他们报告了测量活动范围、疼痛、水肿和职业表现的常用评估方法。职业表现通过非标准化的以职业为重点的评估进行评估,如非正式谈话。据报告,运动、疼痛管理和以职业为重点的非正式谈话是最常用的干预措施。在 82 位受访者中,有 74 位(91.4%)表示,他们按照自己的意愿使用了以身体功能和结构为重点的干预措施。只有 41 名受访者(50.0%)在他们希望的范围内使用了以职业为重点或以职业为基础的干预措施:讨论:报告身体功能和结构的评估和干预措施使用得最频繁,而报告活动和参与的评估和干预措施使用得较少。以职业为重点的评估和干预比以职业为基础的评估和干预更常用。手部治疗师认为,以职业为基础的评估和干预在 HRD 后的康复中非常重要,尽管使用这些评估和干预的患者很少。据报告,在实施以职业为中心的方法方面存在一些障碍:习惯、工作量、时间限制和环境。
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
Hand Therapy
Hand Therapy REHABILITATION-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
13
×
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