Perceptions and practices of paediatric occupational therapists

Q3 Health Professions
K. Murphy, S. Governey
{"title":"Perceptions and practices of paediatric occupational therapists","authors":"K. Murphy, S. Governey","doi":"10.1108/IJOT-02-2018-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to feedback the results of a survey of paediatric occupational therapists completed by the Paediatric Advisory Group (PAG) regarding perceptions and practices of the assessment of need (AON) process. This survey was completed to gather feedback from occupational therapists about the impact of the AON process on paediatric occupational therapy practice in Ireland.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA questionnaire was developed by the authors, who were on the PAG committee, to specifically gather quantitative and qualitative information about the AON. A snowball sampling method was utilised. The results were grouped into themes related to the practices and recommendations from occupational therapists nationally.\n\n\nFindings\nSurveys were returned from 98 paediatric occupational therapists with a wide national geographical spread with the majority working in the HSE. The amount of time spent on AON assessments, as well as the length of reports, varied nationally. The process of how assessments were completed (unidisciplinary or multidisciplinary) and whether a diagnosis was provided was inconsistent. Concerns were raised about the negative ethical impact of the AON on service provision and intervention and the need for further training of staff along with more frequent assessment reviews. The respondents also highlighted concerns about the increasing age of the AON criteria, with no increase in resources, and they provided suggestions for improvements for the future.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe survey was sent to all AOTI and PAG members via gatekeepers and then forwarded to others, resulting in a snowball sampling technique; however, this does not represent all paediatric occupational therapists nationally as membership in these groups is voluntary.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe concerns and inequities raised in the survey regarding occupational therapy practices of completing the AON process need to be shared with relevant stakeholders both at the occupational therapy management level and in the HSE and Department of Health/Disability. The PAG will continue to highlight these concerns from their members to relevant parties and by disseminating findings in articles such as this.\n\n\nSocial implications\nEthical concerns were raised by some members about the equity of access to interventions as a result of the AON process. The social implication of this for families and children is pertinent, particularly in the context of the increased age in the AON criteria without any increase in resources.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe PAG aims to support paediatric occupational therapists nationally and the committee often gathers feedback from members regarding concerns which affect day-to-day practice in paediatric OT. Sharing of this information with IJOT readers helps to highlight the challenges faced by paediatric occupational therapists nationally.\n","PeriodicalId":36571,"journal":{"name":"Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/IJOT-02-2018-0004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOT-02-2018-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to feedback the results of a survey of paediatric occupational therapists completed by the Paediatric Advisory Group (PAG) regarding perceptions and practices of the assessment of need (AON) process. This survey was completed to gather feedback from occupational therapists about the impact of the AON process on paediatric occupational therapy practice in Ireland. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire was developed by the authors, who were on the PAG committee, to specifically gather quantitative and qualitative information about the AON. A snowball sampling method was utilised. The results were grouped into themes related to the practices and recommendations from occupational therapists nationally. Findings Surveys were returned from 98 paediatric occupational therapists with a wide national geographical spread with the majority working in the HSE. The amount of time spent on AON assessments, as well as the length of reports, varied nationally. The process of how assessments were completed (unidisciplinary or multidisciplinary) and whether a diagnosis was provided was inconsistent. Concerns were raised about the negative ethical impact of the AON on service provision and intervention and the need for further training of staff along with more frequent assessment reviews. The respondents also highlighted concerns about the increasing age of the AON criteria, with no increase in resources, and they provided suggestions for improvements for the future. Research limitations/implications The survey was sent to all AOTI and PAG members via gatekeepers and then forwarded to others, resulting in a snowball sampling technique; however, this does not represent all paediatric occupational therapists nationally as membership in these groups is voluntary. Practical implications The concerns and inequities raised in the survey regarding occupational therapy practices of completing the AON process need to be shared with relevant stakeholders both at the occupational therapy management level and in the HSE and Department of Health/Disability. The PAG will continue to highlight these concerns from their members to relevant parties and by disseminating findings in articles such as this. Social implications Ethical concerns were raised by some members about the equity of access to interventions as a result of the AON process. The social implication of this for families and children is pertinent, particularly in the context of the increased age in the AON criteria without any increase in resources. Originality/value The PAG aims to support paediatric occupational therapists nationally and the committee often gathers feedback from members regarding concerns which affect day-to-day practice in paediatric OT. Sharing of this information with IJOT readers helps to highlight the challenges faced by paediatric occupational therapists nationally.
儿科职业治疗师的认知和实践
目的本文的目的是反馈儿科咨询小组(PAG)完成的一项关于需求评估(AON)过程的认知和实践的儿科职业治疗师调查结果。完成这项调查是为了收集职业治疗师关于AON过程对爱尔兰儿科职业治疗实践影响的反馈。设计/方法/方法PAG委员会的作者编制了一份问卷,专门收集有关AON的定量和定性信息。采用了滚雪球抽样法。研究结果被分为与全国职业治疗师的实践和建议相关的主题。调查结果来自98名儿科职业治疗师,分布在全国各地,其中大多数在HSE工作。用于AON评估的时间以及报告的长度在全国范围内各不相同。如何完成评估(单学科或多学科)以及是否提供诊断的过程不一致。有人对AON对服务提供和干预的负面道德影响以及对工作人员进行进一步培训以及更频繁的评估审查的必要性表示关切。受访者还强调了对AON标准年龄增长的担忧,而资源没有增加,他们为未来的改进提供了建议。研究局限性/含义调查通过看门人发送给AOTI和PAG的所有成员,然后转发给其他人,形成了滚雪球抽样技术;然而,这并不代表全国所有的儿科职业治疗师,因为这些团体的成员是自愿的。实际含义需要与职业治疗管理层、HSE和卫生/残疾部的相关利益相关者分享调查中提出的关于完成AON流程的职业治疗实践的担忧和不公平现象。PAG将继续向相关各方强调其成员的这些关切,并在此类文章中传播调查结果。社会影响一些成员对AON过程中获得干预的公平性提出了伦理问题。这对家庭和儿童的社会影响是相关的,特别是在AON标准中年龄增加而资源没有增加的情况下。独创性/价值PAG旨在支持全国范围内的儿科职业治疗师,委员会经常收集成员对影响儿科OT日常实践的问题的反馈。与IJOT读者分享这些信息有助于突出全国儿科职业治疗师面临的挑战。
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
Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy
Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy Health Professions-Occupational Therapy
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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