认知评估在单一医疗保健校园连续护理中的应用

Amanda J. Blattman, Sara Stephenson
{"title":"认知评估在单一医疗保健校园连续护理中的应用","authors":"Amanda J. Blattman, Sara Stephenson","doi":"10.33790/jrpr1100114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"s Background: This article describes occupational therapists’(OTs) use of cognitive assessments (standardized and nonstandardized) over 6 months on a healthcare campus. Also described are OTs’ use of the results of cognitive assessments to substantiate recommendations such as family education, safety, discharge disposition, and return to driving. Method: An anonymous, 10-question survey was emailed to over 50 occupational therapists on a healthcare campus in three practice settings: acute hospital, neurological rehabilitation, and outpatient. Survey questions included the use of standardized and nonstandardized cognitive assessments and how results influence occupational therapist’s recommendations and clinical decision-making. Results: Over 80% of the reported tests administered over 6 months were nonstandardized or screening assessments versus 14% standardized assessments. Trends for the use of nonstandardized over standardized tests appeared to be related to time constraints and productivity demands, although comments stated that limited inferences could be made from nonstandardized assessments. Additionally, themes emerged regarding the influence that practice setting has on clinical decision-making and the overall use of cognitive assessments. Conclusion: Across practice settings, OT on this healthcare campus use cognitive assessments and results to provide various recommendations that are influenced by the setting. In all practice settings, therapists more often implement nonstandardized versus standardized assessments to access cognition. Running the continuum of care on a healthcare campus Cognitive","PeriodicalId":413567,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rehabilitation Practices and Research","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Cognitive Assessments across the Continuum of Care on a Single Health Care Campus\",\"authors\":\"Amanda J. Blattman, Sara Stephenson\",\"doi\":\"10.33790/jrpr1100114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"s Background: This article describes occupational therapists’(OTs) use of cognitive assessments (standardized and nonstandardized) over 6 months on a healthcare campus. Also described are OTs’ use of the results of cognitive assessments to substantiate recommendations such as family education, safety, discharge disposition, and return to driving. Method: An anonymous, 10-question survey was emailed to over 50 occupational therapists on a healthcare campus in three practice settings: acute hospital, neurological rehabilitation, and outpatient. Survey questions included the use of standardized and nonstandardized cognitive assessments and how results influence occupational therapist’s recommendations and clinical decision-making. Results: Over 80% of the reported tests administered over 6 months were nonstandardized or screening assessments versus 14% standardized assessments. Trends for the use of nonstandardized over standardized tests appeared to be related to time constraints and productivity demands, although comments stated that limited inferences could be made from nonstandardized assessments. Additionally, themes emerged regarding the influence that practice setting has on clinical decision-making and the overall use of cognitive assessments. Conclusion: Across practice settings, OT on this healthcare campus use cognitive assessments and results to provide various recommendations that are influenced by the setting. In all practice settings, therapists more often implement nonstandardized versus standardized assessments to access cognition. Running the continuum of care on a healthcare campus Cognitive\",\"PeriodicalId\":413567,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rehabilitation Practices and Research\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rehabilitation Practices and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33790/jrpr1100114\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rehabilitation Practices and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33790/jrpr1100114","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景:本文描述了职业治疗师(OTs)在医疗保健校园6个月的认知评估(标准化和非标准化)使用情况。此外,还描述了门诊医生使用认知评估结果来证实诸如家庭教育、安全、出院处置和重返驾驶等建议。方法:通过电子邮件向医疗保健校园三种实践环境中的50多名职业治疗师进行了一项匿名的、包含10个问题的调查:急性医院、神经康复和门诊。调查问题包括使用标准化和非标准化的认知评估,以及结果如何影响职业治疗师的建议和临床决策。结果:超过80%的报告在6个月内进行的测试是非标准化或筛选评估,而标准化评估为14%。使用非标准化测试而非标准化测试的趋势似乎与时间限制和生产力要求有关,尽管评论指出,从非标准化评估中可以得出有限的推论。此外,还出现了关于实践环境对临床决策和认知评估总体使用的影响的主题。结论:在整个实践环境中,该医疗保健校园的OT使用认知评估和结果来提供受环境影响的各种建议。在所有的实践环境中,治疗师更多地采用非标准化与标准化评估来获取认知。在医疗保健校园中运行连续的护理认知
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of Cognitive Assessments across the Continuum of Care on a Single Health Care Campus
s Background: This article describes occupational therapists’(OTs) use of cognitive assessments (standardized and nonstandardized) over 6 months on a healthcare campus. Also described are OTs’ use of the results of cognitive assessments to substantiate recommendations such as family education, safety, discharge disposition, and return to driving. Method: An anonymous, 10-question survey was emailed to over 50 occupational therapists on a healthcare campus in three practice settings: acute hospital, neurological rehabilitation, and outpatient. Survey questions included the use of standardized and nonstandardized cognitive assessments and how results influence occupational therapist’s recommendations and clinical decision-making. Results: Over 80% of the reported tests administered over 6 months were nonstandardized or screening assessments versus 14% standardized assessments. Trends for the use of nonstandardized over standardized tests appeared to be related to time constraints and productivity demands, although comments stated that limited inferences could be made from nonstandardized assessments. Additionally, themes emerged regarding the influence that practice setting has on clinical decision-making and the overall use of cognitive assessments. Conclusion: Across practice settings, OT on this healthcare campus use cognitive assessments and results to provide various recommendations that are influenced by the setting. In all practice settings, therapists more often implement nonstandardized versus standardized assessments to access cognition. Running the continuum of care on a healthcare campus Cognitive
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信