Date Presented 03/28/20
This qualitative study explored how OT practitioners (OTPs) address community participation (CP) within their clinical practices. Three interviews yielded four themes: OT’s role in CP, professional context, professional resources, and the “how to ” of CP. Findings demonstrate that OTPs have an important role in addressing CP. This poster presentation includes an overview of strategies that can support practitioners to more effectively address CP across practice settings.
Primary Author and Speaker: Emily McLane
Additional Authors and Speakers: Jenna Heffron
Contributing Authors: Leslie Reid
PURPOSE: Despite existing disability anti-discrimination legislation, people with disabilities continue to experience barriers to fully participating in their communities of choice, which can negatively impact their overall health, well-being, and quality of life (Hjelle & Vik, 2011; Hammell & Iwama, 2012). OT practitioners (OTPs) have a role in supporting community participation (CP) and occupational justice for people with disabilities (AOTA, 2014), yet there are limited resources available to support OTPs to effectively integrate CP into their practice. The purpose of this research was to explore the experiences of OTPs who address CP in their practice in order to gain insight into the barriers and facilitators they experience as well as strategies and recommendations to better support CP for people with disabilities. This research was guided by the following questions: (1) What are OT practitioners doing to support clients with disabilities to participate in their communities? (2) What facilitators and barriers do OT practitioners experience while supporting their clients to participate in their communities? (3) What recommendations do OT practitioners have for the profession to better support CP for their clients with disabilities?
DESIGN: This qualitative research study is situated within a constructivist paradigm and uses a phenomenological perspective to explore the multiple realities of implementing CP in OT practice (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Purposeful chain sampling was used to recruit three participants with experience addressing CP in diverse practice settings, including community mental health, community rehabilitation, acute care, and acute rehabilitation.
METHOD: Data were collected through two semi-structured interviews with each participant. Content analysis and a constant comparative method were used to analyze data, and an audit trail was maintained throughout the process (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Participants had the opportunity to member check results after they were analyzed and provide additional feedback and edits.
RESULTS: Interviews yielded four themes that can help to understand the experiences of OTPs working in the area of CP: (1) OT’s role in CP; (2) professional context; (3) professional resources; and (4) the “how to” of CP. Participants described CP as situated within OT’s domain, the unique perspectives the OT profession brings to addressing CP, and OT’s particular role in addressing CP. Participants also described three levels of contextual factors (macro, mesa, and micro) that influence OT practitioners’ abilities to address CP and described formal education, access to research and theories, and the ability to network as impacting OTP knowledge and skills pertaining to CP. Finally, participants described specific interventions that can be used to address CP, strategies they have used to navigate systemic barriers, and recommendations they have for the OT profession. Overall, findings suggest that there are a multitude of ways that OTPs can address CP-related needs of clients with disabilities, but that awareness of and ability to navigate institutional and systemic barriers, as well as a commitment to creative problem solving, can be crucial to effectively addressing CP in OT practice.
CONCLUSION: Findings indicate the need for further research and resources related to CP to affirm and advocate OT practitioners’ qualifications in addressing CP across settings.
This research points to a need for, and could serve as a catalyst for the development of, a guiding document or conceptual map that outlines OT’s role and strategies to support the integration of CP across practice settings, as well as strategies to ensure that CP is more meaningfully integrated into OT education, practice, and scholarship.
References
Hjelle, K. M., & Vik, K., (2011). The ups and downs of social participation experiences of wheelchair users in norway. Disability and Rehabilitation, 3, 25-26, 24792489. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2011.575525
Hammell, K. R. W., & Iwama, M. K. (2012). Well-being and occupational rights: An imperative for critical occupational therapy. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 19, 385-394. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.ithaca.edu:2048/login?qurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3daph%26AN%3d79121744%26site%3dehost-live%26scope
American Occupational Therapy Association (2014). Occupational therapy practice framework: Domain and process, 3rd ed. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68(Suppl. 1) S1–S48. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2014.682006
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Data collection. In H. Salmon, J. Scappini, C. Peason, L. Larson, M. Markanich & A. Syring (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and research design. (4th ed., pp. 147-180). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
