Early career occupational therapists' perceptions of occupational justice in practice in Singapore.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION
British Journal of Occupational Therapy Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-17 DOI:10.1177/03080226241302933
Valenie Tay, Philiana Chua, Nathaniel Gnoh, Kaylynn Goh, Karina M Dancza
{"title":"Early career occupational therapists' perceptions of occupational justice in practice in Singapore.","authors":"Valenie Tay, Philiana Chua, Nathaniel Gnoh, Kaylynn Goh, Karina M Dancza","doi":"10.1177/03080226241302933","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Occupational justice addresses social, political and economic factors influencing occupational participation as a human right. Implementing occupational justice is challenging due to institutional, personal, environmental and cultural barriers, and may be further complicated in non-Western contexts. Early career occupational therapists often struggle to apply these principles while transitioning from education to practice, despite their desire to advocate for justice-focused practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative descriptive study, grounded in social constructivism, explored the experiences of early career occupational therapists applying occupational justice in Singapore. Using snowball sampling of 2020 and 2021 graduates, participants engaged in one-time semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Of 140 potential participants, 10 responded and completed the study. Four themes were developed: (1) Feeling uncertain about occupational justice, (2) Perceived relevance in the Singaporean context, (3) Early career challenges and (4) Aspiration to be agents of change.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Early career occupational therapists expressed uncertainty in applying occupational justice concepts, often confusing them with occupation-centred practice. Despite recognising individual influences, they felt ill-prepared to tackle systemic barriers and advocate for broader social change. However, participants were aware and willing to support occupational justice ideals, suggesting a need for more guidance to integrate individual therapeutic goals with societal advocacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":49096,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Occupational Therapy","volume":"88 4","pages":"217-227"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12033729/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Occupational Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03080226241302933","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Occupational justice addresses social, political and economic factors influencing occupational participation as a human right. Implementing occupational justice is challenging due to institutional, personal, environmental and cultural barriers, and may be further complicated in non-Western contexts. Early career occupational therapists often struggle to apply these principles while transitioning from education to practice, despite their desire to advocate for justice-focused practices.

Methods: This qualitative descriptive study, grounded in social constructivism, explored the experiences of early career occupational therapists applying occupational justice in Singapore. Using snowball sampling of 2020 and 2021 graduates, participants engaged in one-time semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.

Findings: Of 140 potential participants, 10 responded and completed the study. Four themes were developed: (1) Feeling uncertain about occupational justice, (2) Perceived relevance in the Singaporean context, (3) Early career challenges and (4) Aspiration to be agents of change.

Conclusion: Early career occupational therapists expressed uncertainty in applying occupational justice concepts, often confusing them with occupation-centred practice. Despite recognising individual influences, they felt ill-prepared to tackle systemic barriers and advocate for broader social change. However, participants were aware and willing to support occupational justice ideals, suggesting a need for more guidance to integrate individual therapeutic goals with societal advocacy.

新加坡早期职业治疗师对职业公正的认知。
引言:职业正义将影响职业参与的社会、政治和经济因素视为一项人权。由于制度、个人、环境和文化障碍,实现职业公正具有挑战性,在非西方背景下可能会更加复杂。早期职业职业治疗师在从教育过渡到实践的过程中,往往难以应用这些原则,尽管他们希望倡导以正义为中心的实践。方法:本研究以社会建构主义为基础,探讨新加坡早期职业治疗师运用职业公正的经验。通过对2020年和2021年毕业生进行滚雪球抽样,参与者进行了一次性半结构化访谈,并逐字记录并进行了主题分析。结果:在140名潜在参与者中,有10人回应并完成了研究。研究发展了四个主题:(1)对职业公正感到不确定;(2)在新加坡背景下的感知相关性;(3)早期职业挑战;(4)成为变革推动者的愿望。结论:早期职业治疗师在应用职业公正概念时表现出不确定性,经常将其与以职业为中心的实践混淆。尽管认识到个人的影响,但他们觉得在解决系统障碍和倡导更广泛的社会变革方面准备不足。然而,参与者意识到并愿意支持职业正义理想,这表明需要更多的指导,将个人治疗目标与社会倡导结合起来。
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
2.20
自引率
15.40%
发文量
81
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: British Journal of Occupational Therapy (BJOT) is the official journal of the Royal College of Occupational Therapists. Its purpose is to publish articles with international relevance that advance knowledge in research, practice, education, and management in occupational therapy. It is a monthly peer reviewed publication that disseminates evidence on the effectiveness, benefit, and value of occupational therapy so that occupational therapists, service users, and key stakeholders can make informed decisions. BJOT publishes research articles, reviews, practice analyses, opinion pieces, editorials, letters to the editor and book reviews. It also regularly publishes special issues on topics relevant to occupational therapy.
×
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