Advancing the use of theory in occupational therapy: A collaborative process / Promouvoir l’application de la théorie en ergothérapie : un processus de collaboration
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2013
Advancing the use of theory in occupational therapy: A collaborative process / Promouvoir l’application de la théorie en ergothérapie : un processus de collaboration
Theory is important to the growth and evolution of occupational therapy. However, use of theory remains challenging for many therapists.
Purpose.
The aim was to develop a process that occupational therapists could apply to advance theory in practice.
Method.
Based on a review of the literature and using a qualitative instrumental case study design, 18 student occupational therapists and eight fieldwork educators completed online modules on the theory advancement concepts generated from the literature, wrote journals, and/or participated in online discussions during fieldwork. Following fieldwork, educators were interviewed and students participated in focus groups exploring their experiences. Directed content analysis was used to analyze the data.
Findings.
Based on the data collected, we developed the Theory Advancement Process (TAP). The TAP is composed of four primary contexts, a climate of collaborative relationships with four key elements, and four essential processes.
Implications.
The TAP presents a collaborative process for students, faculty, and therapists to work together to advance the use of theory in practice.
Description.
La théorie est essentielle à la croissance et l’évolution de l’ergothérapie. Toutefois, l’application de la théorie représente toujours un défi pour de nombreux ergothérapeutes.
But.
Élaborer un processus que les ergothérapeutes pourront utiliser pour appliquer la théorie à la pratique.
Méthodologie.
Dans le cadre d’une recension des écrits et d’une étude de cas instrumentale et qualitative, dix-huit étudiants en ergothérapie et huit enseignants cliniques ont effectué des modules en ligne sur les concepts de l’avancement de la théorie tirés de la littérature; les participants ont également tenu un journal de bord ou ont pris part à des discussions en ligne pendant les stages. Après les stages, les enseignants ont été interviewés et les étudiants ont participé à des groupes de discussion en vue d’explorer leurs expériences. Une analyse de contenu dirigée a été utilisée pour analyser les données.
Résultats.
En nous basant sur les données recueillies, nous avons conçu le Theory Advancement Process (TAP). Le TAP est composé de quatre contextes primaires, d’un climat de relations fondées sur la collaboration comportant quatre éléments clés et de quatre processus essentiels.
Conséquences.
Le TAP présente un processus de collaboration permettant aux étudiants faculté et aux thérapeutes de travailler ensemble en vue de promouvoir l’application de la théorie dans la pratique.
Association of Canadian Occupational Therapy Regulatory Organizations. (2011). Essential competencies of practice for occupational therapists in Canada (3rd ed.). Retrieved from www.coto.org/pdf/Essent_Comp_04.pdf
2.
BonifaceG.FeddenT.HurstH.MasonM.PhelpsC.ReagonC.WaygoodS. (2008). Using theory to underpin an integrated occupational therapy service through the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71, 531–539.
3.
BowenS.MartensP.TeamThe Need to Know. (2005). Demystifying knowledge translation: Learning from the community. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 10, 203–211. doi:10.1258/135581905774414213
4.
Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. (1997). Enabling occupation: An occupational therapy perspective. Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
5.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (2010). Knowledge translation in health care: Moving from evidence to practice. Retrieved fromhttp://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/40618.html#1
6.
ColeM. B.,TufanoR. (2008). Applied theories in occupational therapy: A practical approach. Thorofare, NJ: Slack.
7.
ColquhounH.LettsL.LawM.MacDermidJ.MissiunaC. (2010). A scoping review of the use of theory in studies of knowledge translation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77, 270–279. doi:10.2182/cjot.2010.77.5.3
8.
CraikJ.,RappoltS. (2003). Theory of research utilization enhancement: A model for occupational therapy. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 266–275. doi:10.5014/cjot.57.5.589
DuncanE. (2006). Foundations for practice in occupational therapy (4th ed.). Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone.
11.
ElliottS. J.VeldeB. P.WittmanP. P. (2002). The use of theory in everyday practice: An exploratory study. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 16(1), 45–62. doi:10.1300/J003v16n01_04
12.
FearingV.LawM.ClarkJ. (1997). An Occupational Performance Process Model: Fostering client and therapist alliances. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 7–15. doi:10.1177/000841749706400103
13.
FinlaysonM. (2009). Extending an invitation for discussion and debate. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 76, 3–4.
14.
ForsythK.Summerfield-MannL.KielhofnerG. (2005). Scholarship of practice: Making occupation-focused, theory-driven, evidence-based practice a reality. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 260–268.
15.
GrahamI. D.LoganJ.HarrisonM. B.StraussS. E.TetroeJ.CaswellW.RobinsonN. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map?Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24. doi:10.1002/chp.47
16.
GrimshawJ. M.ShirranL.ThomasR.MowattG.FraserC.BeroL.O’BrienM. A. (2001). Changing provider behavior: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Medical Care, 39, 2–45. doi:10.1097/00005650-200108002-00002
17.
GrimshawJ. M.ThomasR. E.MaclennanG.FraserC.RamsayC. R.ValeL.DonaldsonC. (2004). Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technology Assessment, 8, 1–72.
18.
HammelJ.FinlaysonM.KielhofnerG.HelfrichC.PetersonE. (2002). Educating scholars of practice: An approach to preparing tomorrow’s researchers. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 15(1/2), 157–176.
19.
HammellK. W. (2009). Sacred texts: A sceptical exploration of the assumptions underpinning theories of occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 76, 6–13. doi:10.1177/000841740907600105
20.
HsiehH. F.,ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687
21.
IkiuguM. N. (2010). Analyzing and critiquing occupational therapy practice models using Mosey’s extrapolation method. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 24, 193–205. doi:10.3109/07380570903521641
22.
IkiuguM. N.,SmallfieldS. (2011). Ikiugu’s eclectic method of combining theoretical conceptual practice models in occupational therapy. Australian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 58, 437–446. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.2011.00968.x
23.
IkiuguM. N.SmallfieldS.ConditC. (2009). A framework for combining theoretical conceptual practice models in occupational therapy practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77, 162–170. doi:10.1177/000841740907600305
24.
KeponenR.,LauniainenH. (2008). Using the model of human occupation to nurture an occupational focus in the clinical reasoning of experienced therapists. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 22(2/3), 95–104. doi:10.1080 /0738 0570 801989549
25.
KielhofnerG. (1980). Model of human occupation: Part II. Ontogenesis from the perspective of temporal adaptation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 34, 657–663.
26.
KielhofnerG. (2005a). Research concepts in clinical scholarship: Scholarship and practice. Bridging the divide. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 231–239. doi:10.1300/J003v19n01_02
27.
KielhofnerG. (2005b). A scholarship of practice: Creating discourse between theory, research and practice. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 19(1/2), 7–16. doi:10.1300/J003v19n01_02
28.
KinsellaE.,WhitefordG. (2009). Knowledge generation and utilisation in occupational therapy: Towards epistemic reflexivity. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 56, 249–258. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.2007.00726.x
29.
KitsonA.HarveyG.McCormackB. (1998). Enabling the implementation of evidence based practice: A conceptual framework. Quality in Health Care, 7, 149–158. doi:10.1136/qshc.7.3.149
30.
KnowlesM.HoltonE.SwansonR. (2005). The adult learner. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
31.
KreftingL. H. (1985). The use of conceptual models in clinical practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52, 173–178. doi:10.1177/000841748505200402
32.
LawM.,McCollM. (1989). Knowledge and use of theory among occupational therapists: A Canadian survey. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 56, 198–204. doi:10.1177/000841748905600409
LawM.MissiunaC.PollockN. (2008). Knowledge exchange and translation: An essential competency in the twenty-first century. OT Now, 10(5), 3–5.
35.
LeeJ. (2010). Achieving best practice: A review of evidence linked to occupation-focused practice models. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 24, 206–222. doi:10.3109/07380577.2010.483270
36.
LeeS. W.TaylorR.KielhofnerG. (2009). Choice, knowledge, and utilization of a practice theory: A national study of occupational therapists who use the model of human occupation. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 23, 60–71. doi:10.1080/07380570802455540
37.
LeeS. W.TaylorR.KielhofnerG.FisherG. (2008). Theory use in practice: A national survey of therapists who use the model of human occupation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 106–117. doi:10.5014/ajot.62.1.106
38.
LencuchaR.KothariA.RouseM. (2007). Knowledge translation: A concept for occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61, 593–596. doi:10.5014/ajot.61.5.593
39.
McCollM. A. (2000). Selecting a theoretical approach. In FearingV. G.ClarkJ. (Eds.), Individuals in context: A practical guide to client-centered practice (pp. 45–54). Thorofare, NJ: Slack.
40.
MeltonJ.ForsythK.FreethD. (2009). Using theory in practice. In DuncanE. (Ed.), Skills for practice in occupational therapy (pp. 9–23). Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier.
41.
MeltonJ.ForsythK.FreethD. (2010). A practice development programme to promote the use of the model of human occupation: Contexts, influential mechanisms and levels of engagement amongst occupational therapists. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 549–558. doi:10.4276/0308022 10X12 89 2992239350
42.
MenonA.Korner-BitenskyN.KastnerM.McKibbonK. A.StrausS. (2009). Strategies for rehabilitation professionals to move evidence based knowledge into practice: A systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 41, 1024–1032. doi:10.2340/16501977-0451
43.
MortensonW. B.DyckI. (2006). Power and client-centred practice: An insider exploration of occupational therapists’ experiences. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 261–271. doi:10.2182/cjot.06.008
44.
O’NealS.DickersonA.HolbertD. (2007). The use of theory by occupational therapists working with adults with developmental disabilities. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 21(4), 71–85. doi:10.1300/J003v21n04_04
45.
PavalkoR. M. (1971). Sociology of occupations and professions. Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock.
46.
PépinG.GuéretteF.LefebvreB.JacquesP. (2008). Canadian therapists’ experiences while implementing the Model of Human Occupation remotivation process. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 22(2/3), 115–124. doi:10.1080/07380570801989580
47.
PolatajkoH. J.CraikJ.DavisJ.TownsendE. A. (2007). Canadian Practice Process Framework. In E. A. Townsend & H. J. Polatajko, Enabling occupation II: Advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being, and justice through occupation (p. 233). Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
RogersE. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
50.
SamesK. M. (2010). Documenting occupational therapy practice (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson.
51.
ShentonA. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22, 63–75. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2004.01.006
52.
StakeR. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53.
StewardB. (1996). The theory/practice divide: Bridging the gap in occupational therapy. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 264–268.
54.
StorchB. A.,EskowK. G. (1996) Theory application by school-based occupational therapists. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50, 662–668. doi:10.5014/ajot.50.8.662
SumsionT.,LawM. (2006). A review of evidence on the conceptual elements informing client-centred practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 153–162. doi:10.1016/B978-0-443-10171-7.50007-9
57.
TownsendE. A. (2003). Reflections on power and justice in enabling occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 74–87. doi:10.1177/000841740307000203
58.
TownsendE. A.BeaganB.Kumas-TanZ.VersnelJ.IwamaM.LandryJ.,…BrownJ. (2007). Enabling: Occupational therapy’s core competency. In E. A. Townsend & H. J. Polatajko, Enabling occupation II: Advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being, and justice through occupation (pp. 87–133). Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
59.
TownsendE. A.,PolatajkoH. J. (2007). Enabling occupation II: Advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being, and justice through occupation. Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
60.
WimpennyK.ForsythK.JonesC.MathesonL.ColleyJ. (2010). Implementing the Model of Human Occupation across a mental health occupational therapy service: Communities of practice and a participatory change process. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 507–516. doi:10.4276/030802210X12892992239152
61.
YinR. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
62.
ZhangC.McCarthyC.CraikJ. (2008). Students as translators for the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement. OT Now, 10(3), 5–8.
