The Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) is a standardized occupation-based measure; however, barriers often limit use in practice. The Knowledge to Action Framework (KTA) is one of the most widely used implementation approaches to induce practice change. The objective of the study is to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a KTA-informed intervention to increase the use of the AMPS. AMPS-trained occupational therapists were recruited through convenience sampling. Interventions included workshops, action planning, goal setting, peer support, and organizational resources. Recruitment and retention were tracked. Pre- and post-survey results of interventions’ helpfulness, AMPS behaviors, and motivational changes informed acceptability. Participants (n = 5) rated 7/7 (100%) intervention strategies as helpful, reported decreased barriers and increased frequency of AMPS administration, increased resources for AMPS implementation, and improved compatibility with practice. Implementation of a KTA-informed intervention to increase AMPS practice was feasible and supported by environmental changes and peer support in a physical rehabilitation setting.
AlotaibiN. M.ReedK.NadarM. S. (2009). Assessments used in occupational therapy practice: An exploratory study. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 23(4), 302–318. https://doi.org10.3109/07380570903222583
AsabaE.NakamuraM.AsabaA.KottorpA. (2017). Integrating occupational therapy specific assessments in practice: Exploring practitioner experiences. Occupational Therapy International, 2017, 7602805. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7602805
4.
BanduraA. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
5.
BernspångB.FisherA. G. (1995). Validation of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills for use in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2, 3–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/11038129509106792
6.
BuchanT. (2002). The impact of language and culture when administering the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills: A case study. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65(8), 371–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802260206500804
7.
ChardG. (2000). An investigation into the use of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) in clinical practice. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 481–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802260006301005
8.
ChardG. (2004). Implementing the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) in the workplace: A comparison of the experiences of occupational therapists and new graduates. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802260406700202
9.
ChardG. (2006). Adopting the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills into practice: Therapists’ voices. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69, 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802260606900202
10.
ColquhounH. L.LettsL. J.LawM. C.MacDermidJ. C.MissiunaC. A. (2012). Administration of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure: Effect on practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 79, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.2182/cjot.2012.79.2.7
11.
FisherA.JonesK. (2010). Assessment of Motor and Process Skills Vol. 1: Development, standardization and administration manual (7th ed.). Three Start Press.
GillenG.NilsenD. M.AttridgeJ.BanakosE.MorganM.WinterbottomL.YorkW. (2015). Effectiveness of interventions to improve occupational performance of people with cognitive impairments after stroke: An evidence based review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69, 6901180040p1–6901180040p9. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2015.012138
14.
GoldmanS. L.FisherA. G. (1997). Cross-cultural validation of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS). British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60, 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F030802269706000210
15.
GotoS.FisherA. G.MayberryW. L. (1996). AMPS applied cross-culturally to the Japanese. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50, 798–806. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.50.10.798
16.
GrahamI. D.LoganJ.HarrisonM. B.StrausS.TetroeJ.CaswellW.RobinsonN. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map?Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26, 13–24.
17.
GutierrezD.KaplanS. L. (2016). Aligning documentation with congenital muscular torticollis clinical practice guidelines: Administrative case report. Physical Therapy, 96(1), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20150012
18.
HockingC. (2001). Implementing occupation-based assessment. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55(4), 463–469. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.55.4.463
19.
HuijgJ. M.GebhardtW. A.DusseldorpE.VerheijdenM. W.van der ZouweN.MiddelkoopB. J.CroneM. R. (2014). Measuring determinants of implementation behavior: Psychometric properties of a questionnaire based on the theoretical domains framework. Implementation Science, 9(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-33
20.
JonesC. A.RoopS. C.PoharS. L.AlbrechtL.ScottS. D. (2015). Translating knowledge in rehabilitation: Systematic review. Physical Therapy, 95(4), 663–677. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20130512
21.
JuckettL. A.WengerdL. R.FaietaJ.GriffinC. E. (2020). Evidence-based practice implementation in stroke rehabilitation: A scoping review of barriers and facilitators. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 74, 7401205050p1–7401205050p14. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2020.035485
22.
KhanS.ChambersD.NetaG. (2021). Revisiting time to translation: Implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in cancer control. Cancer Causes & Control, 32(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-020-01376-z
23.
KottorpA.FisherA. (2015). Evidence-based occupational therapy 2.0–Developing evidence for occupation. Journal of Japanese Association of Occupational Therapists, 34, 349–354. https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/8391
24.
ManeeF. S.NadarM. S.AlotaibiN. M.RassafianiM. (2020). Cognitive assessments used in Occupational therapy practice: A global perspective. Occupational Therapy International, 2020, 8914372. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8914372
25.
MerriamS. B.BieremaL. L. (2004). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.
26.
Microsoft Excel (15.0). [Computer software]. Microsoft.
27.
MooreJ. L.CarpenterJ.DoyleA. M.DoyleL.HansenP.HahnB.HornbyT. G.RothH. R.SpoeriS.TappanR.van der LaanK. (2018). Development, implementation, and use of a process to promote knowledge translation in rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 99(1), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2017.08.476
28.
MooreJ. L.MbalilakiJ. A.GrahamI. D. (2022). Knowledge translation in physical medicine and rehabilitation: A citation analysis of the knowledge-to-action literature. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 103(Suppl. 7), S256–S275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2020.12.031
29.
MooreK.LewisN. (2008). Implementing knowledge translation strategies: Integrating the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills to practice. Occupational Therapy Now, 10(5), 15–16.
30.
OrsmondG. I.CohnE. S. (2015). The distinctive features of a feasibility study: Objectives and guiding questions. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 35(3), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1539449215578649
31.
SalterK. L.KothariA. (2016). Knowledge “translation” as social learning: Negotiating the uptake of research-based knowledge in practice. BMC Medical Education, 16(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0585-5
32.
StrausS.TetroeJ.GrahamI. D. (2013). Knowledge translation in healthcare: Moving from evidence to practice. Wiley-Blackwell.
33.
TomoriK.NagayamaH.OhnoK.NagataniR.SaitoY.TakahashiK.HigashiT. (2015). Comparison of occupation-based and impairment-based occupational therapy for subacute stroke: A randomized controlled feasibility study. Clinical Rehabilitation, 29(8), 752–762. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215514555876
34.
WolfT. J.ChuhA.FloydT.McInnisK.WilliamsE. (2015). Effectiveness of occupation-based interventions to improve areas of occupation and social participation after stroke: An evidence-based review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69(1), 6901180060p1–6901180060p11. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2015.012195
