Pediatric client-centered intervention planning is particularly complex because children, parents, and professionals must form a “tridactic” partnership and reach a shared understanding for therapy. Therapists may use child self-reports to facilitate children's involvement in this process. The purpose of this study was to understand how therapists used and interpreted a child self-report to achieve a shared understanding in the context of a tridactic relationship, using the Children's Occupational Self-Assessment (COSA) as an exemplar. Thirty-three pediatric therapists participated in five focus groups and qualitative analysis was conducted in four iterative phases. Therapists' decision to use the COSA led to either “good” responses or unexpected tensions between the therapist's, child's, and parent's perspectives. Therapists used demonstration, negotiation, or reflection to shift beliefs to achieve a shared understanding for therapy. Findings suggest that although therapists valued children's voices, professional knowledge usually took precedence over child and parent self-knowledge during intervention planning.
AbberleyP. (1995). Disabling ideology in health and welfare: The case of occupational therapy. Disability & Society, 10, 221–232.
2.
AllanJ. (1996). Foucault and Special Educational Needs: A ‘box of tools’ for analysing children's experiences of mainstreaming. Disability & Society, 11, 219.
3.
American Occupational Therapy Association. (2008). Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and process (2nd ed.). American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 625–683.
4.
Ballard-ReischD. S. (1990). A model of participative decision making for physician-patient interaction. Health Communication, 2, 91–104.
5.
CharlesC.GafniA., & WhelanT. (1997). Shared decision making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social Science & Medicine, 44, 681–692.
6.
CohnE.SchellBoyt B. A., & CrepeauE. B. (2010). Occupational therapy as reflective practice. In LyonsN. (Ed.), Handbook of reflection and reflective inquiry: Mapping a way of knowing for professional reflective inquiry (pp. 131–157). New York: Springer.
7.
CohnE.Tickle-DegnenL., & GavettE. (1998). Therapeutic communication: Reliability testing of the therapist language coding system. The Clinical Supervisor, 17, 49–67.
8.
DickieV. A. (2003). Data analysis in qualitative research: A plea for sharing the magic and the effort. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 57, 49–56.
9.
DunfordC.MissiunaC.StreetE., & SibertJ. (2005). Children's perceptions of the impact of developmental coordination disorder on activities of daily living. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 207–214.
10.
FrankG., & PolkinghorneD. (2010). Qualitative research in occupational therapy: From the first to the second generation. OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health, 30, 51–57.
11.
GabeJ.OlumideG., & BuryM. (2004). ‘It takes three to tango’: A framework for understanding patient partnership in paediatric clinics. Social Science & Medicine, 59, 1071–1079.
12.
GarthB.MurphyG. C., & ReddihoughD. S. (2009). Perceptions of participation: Child patients with a disability in the doctor-parent-child partnership. Patient Education and Counseling, 74, 45–52.
13.
HannaK., & RodgerS. (2002). Towards family-centred practice in paediatric occupational therapy: A review of the literature on parent-therapist collaboration. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 49, 14–24.
14.
JamesA.JenksC., & ProutA. (1998). Theorizing childhood. New York: Teachers College Press.
15.
KearneyM. H. (2001). Levels and applications of qualitative research evidence. Research in Nursing and Health, 24, 145–153.
16.
KellerJ.KafkesA.BasuS.FedericoJ., & KielhofnerG. (2005). The Child Occupational Self Assessment (COSA) (version 2.1). Chicago: MOHO Clearinghouse, Department of Occupational Therapy, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago.
17.
KitzingerJ. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311, 299–302.
18.
KramerJ.KielhofnerG., & SmithE. V.Jr. (2010). Validity evidence for the Child Occupational Self Assessment (COSA). American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 621–632.
19.
KramerJ.SmithE. V.Jr., & KielhofnerG. (2009). Rating scale use by children with disabilities on a self report of everyday activitiesArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 90, 2047–2053.
20.
LawM.BabtisteS., & MillsJ. (1995). Client-centered practice: What does it mean and does it make a difference?Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 250–257.
21.
LawlorM. C., & MattinglyC. F. (1998). The complexities embedded in family-centered care. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52, 259–267.
22.
MayallB. (2004). Sociologies of childhood. In HolbornM. (Ed.), Developments in sociology: An annual review (Vol. 20). Lancashire: Causeway Press Ltd.
23.
McGavinH. (1998). Planning rehabilitation: A comparison of issues for parents and adolescents. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 18(1), 69–82.
24.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. B. (Eds.). (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
25.
MissiunaC., & PollockN. (2000). Perceived efficacy and goal setting in young children. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 101–109.
26.
MortensonW. B., & DyckI. (2006). Power and client-centred practice: An insider exploration of occupational therapists' experiences. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 261–271.
27.
O'BrienJ. C.BergeronA.DupreyH.OlverC., & OngeH. (2009). Children with disabilities and their parents' views of occupational participation needs. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 25, 164–180.
28.
PollockN., & StewartD. (1998). Occupational performance needs of school-aged children with physical disabilities in the community. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 18, 55–68.
29.
PriestleyM. (2003). Disability: A life course approach. Cambridge: Polity Press.
30.
RestallG.RipatJ., & SternM. (2003). A framework of strategies for client-centred practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 103–112.
31.
SumsionT. (2004). Pursuing the client's goals really paid off. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 2–9.
32.
SumsionT., & LawM. (2006). A review of evidence on the conceptual elements informing client-centred practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, 153–162.
33.
SumsionT., & SmythG. (2000). Barriers to client-centeredness and their resolution. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 15–21.
34.
TownsendE. (2003). Power and justice in enabling occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70, 74–87.
35.
WilkinsS.PollockN.RochonS., & LawM. (2001). Implementing client-centred practice: Why is it so difficult to do?Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 70–79.
