Education leads to increased adherence to the 'Australian Competency Standards for Occupational Therapy Driver Assessors'.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1080/11038128.2022.2076735
Sally M Fields, Carolyn A Unsworth, Bobby Harreveld
{"title":"Education leads to increased adherence to the 'Australian Competency Standards for Occupational Therapy Driver Assessors'.","authors":"Sally M Fields,&nbsp;Carolyn A Unsworth,&nbsp;Bobby Harreveld","doi":"10.1080/11038128.2022.2076735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Occupational therapy competency standards provide an evidence-base to inform clinical best practice, however it is not known whether education about competency standards will increase occupational therapists' adherence to their use.</p><p><strong>Aims/objectives: </strong>To investigate if education about the <i>'Australian Competency Standards for Occupational Therapy Driver Assessors'</i> leads to increased adherence to the competency standards in the clinical practice of occupational therapy driver assessors.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A mixed methods multiple case study design was used to evaluate 5 occupational therapy driver assessors' adherence to the competency standards. An audit of 25 client files and interviews were conducted to evaluate practice against the competency standards prior to an education session, followed by an audit of a further 25 files, interview and feedback after education.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Qualitative and quantitative analyses suggest that education about the <i>'Australian Competency Standards for Occupational Therapy Driver Assessors'</i> was associated with increased adherence to the competency standards in clinical practice. The results also support the use of competency standards in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and significance: </strong>Competency standards can be used to inform and guide clinical practice, and individualised education and feedback of practice against the competency standards can increase occupational therapists' adherence to these standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":49570,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2022.2076735","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: 4

Abstract

Background: Occupational therapy competency standards provide an evidence-base to inform clinical best practice, however it is not known whether education about competency standards will increase occupational therapists' adherence to their use.

Aims/objectives: To investigate if education about the 'Australian Competency Standards for Occupational Therapy Driver Assessors' leads to increased adherence to the competency standards in the clinical practice of occupational therapy driver assessors.

Materials and methods: A mixed methods multiple case study design was used to evaluate 5 occupational therapy driver assessors' adherence to the competency standards. An audit of 25 client files and interviews were conducted to evaluate practice against the competency standards prior to an education session, followed by an audit of a further 25 files, interview and feedback after education.

Results: Qualitative and quantitative analyses suggest that education about the 'Australian Competency Standards for Occupational Therapy Driver Assessors' was associated with increased adherence to the competency standards in clinical practice. The results also support the use of competency standards in clinical practice.

Conclusions and significance: Competency standards can be used to inform and guide clinical practice, and individualised education and feedback of practice against the competency standards can increase occupational therapists' adherence to these standards.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教育导致越来越多地遵守“澳大利亚职业治疗司机评估员能力标准”。
背景:职业治疗能力标准为临床最佳实践提供了证据基础,然而,目前尚不清楚关于能力标准的教育是否会增加职业治疗师对其使用的依从性。目的/目的:调查关于“澳大利亚职业治疗驾驶评估员能力标准”的教育是否会导致职业治疗驾驶评估员在临床实践中增加对能力标准的遵守。材料与方法:采用混合方法多案例研究设计,对5名职业治疗驱动评估员对胜任力标准的遵守情况进行评估。在培训之前,对25个客户文件和访谈进行了审计,以根据能力标准评估实践,随后在培训后对另外25个文件、访谈和反馈进行了审计。结果:定性和定量分析表明,关于“澳大利亚职业治疗驱动评估员能力标准”的教育与临床实践中对能力标准的依从性增加有关。研究结果也支持在临床实践中使用能力标准。结论与意义:胜任力标准可用于指导临床实践,针对胜任力标准的个性化教育和实践反馈可提高职业治疗师对这些标准的依从性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
15.80%
发文量
45
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy is an internationally well-recognized journal that aims to provide a forum for occupational therapy research worldwide and especially the Nordic countries. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy welcomes: theoretical frameworks, original research reports emanating from quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies, literature reviews, case studies, presentation and evaluation of instruments, evaluation of interventions, learning and teaching in OT, letters to the editor.
期刊最新文献
Occupational therapy's oversight: How science veiled our humanity. Cognitive interviews on the Swedish occupational balance questionnaire. Occupational therapy in the space of artificial intelligence: Ethical considerations and human-centered efforts. Evaluation of a driving clinical decision pathway for generalist occupational therapists: Pilot test of practice change. Developmental coordination disorder questionnaire - translation and adaptation into Danish.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1