建立自我指导的职业治疗活动处方共识:德尔菲研究

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Anna Joy, Alicia Devlin, Natasha A. Lannin, Libby Callaway, Sara L. Whittaker, Natasha K. Brusco
{"title":"建立自我指导的职业治疗活动处方共识:德尔菲研究","authors":"Anna Joy,&nbsp;Alicia Devlin,&nbsp;Natasha A. Lannin,&nbsp;Libby Callaway,&nbsp;Sara L. Whittaker,&nbsp;Natasha K. Brusco","doi":"10.1111/1440-1630.70029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Occupational therapy practice focuses on occupation-based interventions, considering the interaction between the person, environment, and task. In Australia, combining supervised therapy with self-directed practice is feasible, even for health-care consumers with cognitive impairments. This study aims to explore the self-practice programs developed by occupational therapists and delivered in inpatient rehabilitation and develop core recommendations for such interventions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Ethical approval for this Delphi consensus study was granted by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. The study involved an online survey and two focus groups with Australian occupational therapists. Participants were recruited via snowball sampling and required to meet specific experience criteria. Content analysis was used to analyse data, and consensus was reached on core recommendations for prescribing self-practice in inpatient rehabilitation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Consumer and community involvement</h3>\n \n <p>Occupational therapists who prescribe self-practice to health-care consumers were the community of interest and directly involved in the Delphi consensus process to inform study findings. Consumers using self-practice activities were not included in the study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In Round 1 of the Delphi process, 21 occupational therapists participated in an anonymous online survey about prescribing self-practice in inpatient rehabilitation. The survey identified key recommendations across various categories. Round 2 focus groups further refined these recommendations, and Round 3 achieved consensus, incorporating additional feedback and suggestions for implementing self-practice programs. It found variability in implementation, with neurological and general rehabilitation health-care consumers most likely to receive self-practice tasks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This Australian study explored how occupational therapists prescribe self-practice during inpatient rehabilitation. The study emphasised the importance of clinical reasoning and environmental factors, offering recommendations to guide goal-focused, client-centred self-practice interventions for better health-care consumer outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY</h3>\n \n <p>We looked at occupational therapists in Australia. We wanted to know how therapists gave self-practice activities to people. Our focus was on people in recovery hospitals. People do self-practice activities without a therapist. People do these activities outside therapy sessions. This study used a survey and focus groups. Skilled therapists agreed on ideas for self-practice. The results showed differences in self-practice methods. Self-practice is common in stroke and general recovery. The study gave self-practice tips for therapists. It included what, how, and why they prescribe these activities. Therapists should think about each person's goals. They should understand what helps self-practice. We know what therapists are doing. We support therapists to include self-practice programs in regular care.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55418,"journal":{"name":"Australian Occupational Therapy Journal","volume":"72 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1440-1630.70029","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Building consensus on prescribing self-directed occupational therapy activities: A Delphi study\",\"authors\":\"Anna Joy,&nbsp;Alicia Devlin,&nbsp;Natasha A. Lannin,&nbsp;Libby Callaway,&nbsp;Sara L. Whittaker,&nbsp;Natasha K. Brusco\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1440-1630.70029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Occupational therapy practice focuses on occupation-based interventions, considering the interaction between the person, environment, and task. In Australia, combining supervised therapy with self-directed practice is feasible, even for health-care consumers with cognitive impairments. This study aims to explore the self-practice programs developed by occupational therapists and delivered in inpatient rehabilitation and develop core recommendations for such interventions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Ethical approval for this Delphi consensus study was granted by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. The study involved an online survey and two focus groups with Australian occupational therapists. Participants were recruited via snowball sampling and required to meet specific experience criteria. Content analysis was used to analyse data, and consensus was reached on core recommendations for prescribing self-practice in inpatient rehabilitation.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Consumer and community involvement</h3>\\n \\n <p>Occupational therapists who prescribe self-practice to health-care consumers were the community of interest and directly involved in the Delphi consensus process to inform study findings. Consumers using self-practice activities were not included in the study.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>In Round 1 of the Delphi process, 21 occupational therapists participated in an anonymous online survey about prescribing self-practice in inpatient rehabilitation. The survey identified key recommendations across various categories. Round 2 focus groups further refined these recommendations, and Round 3 achieved consensus, incorporating additional feedback and suggestions for implementing self-practice programs. It found variability in implementation, with neurological and general rehabilitation health-care consumers most likely to receive self-practice tasks.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>This Australian study explored how occupational therapists prescribe self-practice during inpatient rehabilitation. The study emphasised the importance of clinical reasoning and environmental factors, offering recommendations to guide goal-focused, client-centred self-practice interventions for better health-care consumer outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY</h3>\\n \\n <p>We looked at occupational therapists in Australia. We wanted to know how therapists gave self-practice activities to people. Our focus was on people in recovery hospitals. People do self-practice activities without a therapist. People do these activities outside therapy sessions. This study used a survey and focus groups. Skilled therapists agreed on ideas for self-practice. The results showed differences in self-practice methods. Self-practice is common in stroke and general recovery. The study gave self-practice tips for therapists. It included what, how, and why they prescribe these activities. Therapists should think about each person's goals. They should understand what helps self-practice. We know what therapists are doing. We support therapists to include self-practice programs in regular care.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Occupational Therapy Journal\",\"volume\":\"72 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1440-1630.70029\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Occupational Therapy Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1440-1630.70029\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Occupational Therapy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1440-1630.70029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

职业治疗实践侧重于基于职业的干预,考虑到人、环境和任务之间的相互作用。在澳大利亚,将有监督的治疗与自我指导的实践相结合是可行的,即使对有认知障碍的保健消费者也是如此。本研究旨在探讨由职业治疗师开发并在住院康复中实施的自我实践计划,并提出此类干预措施的核心建议。方法本德尔菲共识研究经莫纳什大学人类研究伦理委员会批准。这项研究包括一项在线调查和澳大利亚职业治疗师的两个焦点小组。参与者通过滚雪球抽样招募,并要求满足特定的经验标准。采用内容分析法对数据进行分析,对住院康复自我实践处方的核心建议达成共识。消费者和社区参与向保健消费者规定自我实践的职业治疗师是感兴趣的社区,并直接参与德尔菲共识过程,以告知研究结果。使用自我练习活动的消费者不包括在研究中。结果在第一轮德尔菲过程中,21名职业治疗师参与了一项关于在住院康复中自我实践处方的匿名在线调查。调查确定了不同类别的关键建议。第二轮焦点小组进一步完善了这些建议,第三轮达成了共识,纳入了实施自我实践计划的额外反馈和建议。它发现在执行方面存在差异,神经和一般康复保健消费者最有可能接受自我练习任务。结论:澳大利亚的这项研究探讨了职业治疗师在住院康复期间如何规定自我练习。该研究强调了临床推理和环境因素的重要性,为指导以目标为中心、以客户为中心的自我实践干预措施提供了建议,以获得更好的保健消费者结果。我们研究了澳大利亚的职业治疗师。我们想知道治疗师是如何给人们提供自我练习活动的。我们的重点是康复医院的病人。人们在没有治疗师的情况下进行自我练习活动。人们在治疗之外做这些活动。这项研究采用了调查和焦点小组。熟练的治疗师对自我练习的想法达成了一致。结果显示了自我练习方法的差异。自我练习在中风和一般康复中很常见。这项研究为治疗师提供了自我练习的技巧。它包括他们规定这些活动的内容、方式和原因。治疗师应该考虑每个人的目标。他们应该明白什么有助于自我练习。我们知道治疗师在做什么。我们支持治疗师在日常护理中加入自我练习项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Building consensus on prescribing self-directed occupational therapy activities: A Delphi study

Background

Occupational therapy practice focuses on occupation-based interventions, considering the interaction between the person, environment, and task. In Australia, combining supervised therapy with self-directed practice is feasible, even for health-care consumers with cognitive impairments. This study aims to explore the self-practice programs developed by occupational therapists and delivered in inpatient rehabilitation and develop core recommendations for such interventions.

Methods

Ethical approval for this Delphi consensus study was granted by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. The study involved an online survey and two focus groups with Australian occupational therapists. Participants were recruited via snowball sampling and required to meet specific experience criteria. Content analysis was used to analyse data, and consensus was reached on core recommendations for prescribing self-practice in inpatient rehabilitation.

Consumer and community involvement

Occupational therapists who prescribe self-practice to health-care consumers were the community of interest and directly involved in the Delphi consensus process to inform study findings. Consumers using self-practice activities were not included in the study.

Results

In Round 1 of the Delphi process, 21 occupational therapists participated in an anonymous online survey about prescribing self-practice in inpatient rehabilitation. The survey identified key recommendations across various categories. Round 2 focus groups further refined these recommendations, and Round 3 achieved consensus, incorporating additional feedback and suggestions for implementing self-practice programs. It found variability in implementation, with neurological and general rehabilitation health-care consumers most likely to receive self-practice tasks.

Conclusion

This Australian study explored how occupational therapists prescribe self-practice during inpatient rehabilitation. The study emphasised the importance of clinical reasoning and environmental factors, offering recommendations to guide goal-focused, client-centred self-practice interventions for better health-care consumer outcomes.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

We looked at occupational therapists in Australia. We wanted to know how therapists gave self-practice activities to people. Our focus was on people in recovery hospitals. People do self-practice activities without a therapist. People do these activities outside therapy sessions. This study used a survey and focus groups. Skilled therapists agreed on ideas for self-practice. The results showed differences in self-practice methods. Self-practice is common in stroke and general recovery. The study gave self-practice tips for therapists. It included what, how, and why they prescribe these activities. Therapists should think about each person's goals. They should understand what helps self-practice. We know what therapists are doing. We support therapists to include self-practice programs in regular care.

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
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
69
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian Occupational Therapy Journal is a leading international peer reviewed publication presenting influential, high quality innovative scholarship and research relevant to occupational therapy. The aim of the journal is to be a leader in the dissemination of scholarship and evidence to substantiate, influence and shape policy and occupational therapy practice locally and globally. The journal publishes empirical studies, theoretical papers, and reviews. Preference will be given to manuscripts that have a sound theoretical basis, methodological rigour with sufficient scope and scale to make important new contributions to the occupational therapy body of knowledge. AOTJ does not publish protocols for any study design The journal will consider multidisciplinary or interprofessional studies that include occupational therapy, occupational therapists or occupational therapy students, so long as ‘key points’ highlight the specific implications for occupational therapy, occupational therapists and/or occupational therapy students and/or consumers.
×
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