Occupational therapy services in primary care: a scoping review

AIM

To examine and describe the current evidence about occupational therapy services in primary care.

BACKGROUND

Interprofessional primary care teams have been introduced to support the changing demographics and provide more comprehensive and coordinated care. Occupational therapists have the opportunity to play an important role in this expanding area of practice. To do so, occupational therapists must develop roles built on evidence and a clear understanding of the care delivery context.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted based on the scientific and grey literature. Studies that described or examined the occupational therapy role with clients (individuals, groups, communities, populations) of all ages, conditions or occupational issues in a primary care context and that presented or referred to an occupational therapist working in a primary care setting were included. Studies were excluded if they were not in English or French. The Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement was used to chart the data.

FINDINGS

129 articles were identified, with 62 non-research and 67 research-focussed articles. A total of 268 assessments and 868 interventions were identified. The top interventions offered by occupational therapists were referring to/advocating for/coordinating/linking to and navigating community services (n = 36 articles), chronic disease management (n = 34 articles)/self-management education (n = 28 articles), health promotion (n = 30 articles) and falls prevention (n = 27 articles). The predominant focus in the literature is on adult and older adult populations.

The effectiveness of occupational therapy for mental health disorders in primary care: A systematic review

Introduction

Occupational therapy (OT) has a rich history of integrating physical and mental health care services, however, there is a limited evidence base regarding the effectiveness of OT interventions for mental health disorders in primary care.

Methods

A comprehensive systematic review was conducted from database inception through 31 January 2021. Eligible studies had to include: (1) an intervention that involved an occupational therapist in design and/or implementation; (2) a quantitative outcome assessing symptoms related to a mental health disorder; (3) a comparison group; and (4) primary care or community dwelling patients and/or primary care clinical settings.

Results

The researchers identified five studies and there was heterogeneity in the OT interventions. There were no significant differences between intervention and control groups in depression symptoms at different time intervals. Several trials employed interventions that involved interprofessional team members, including OTs, to provide training in specific strategies that promoted functioning. Other studies utilized only OTs within the intervention arm. OT interventions demonstrated no significant difference in anxiety in one study, however, another indicated a reduction in symptoms. The overall risk of bias was considered low in three studies and unclear in two studies.

Conclusion

There is limited evidence demonstrating the impact of OT interventions in primary care settings on quantitative outcomes measuring symptoms related to a mental health disorder. Given the heterogeneity of interventions and variation in reported findings, there is need for further pragmatic trials in this area.

Contemporary approaches in mental health rehabilitation

In many European countries, deinstitutionalisation has been an ongoing process over the last few decades. Mental health organisations were transformed to provide support in a more integrated and comprehensive manner, preferably in their own homes in the community. Yet, despite the welcome aspiration of community integration for all, people with complex mental health problems (also termed severe mental illness) have continued to require high levels of support, in inpatient settings and in the community. This group's needs make them highly dependent on their caregivers. The attitudes, knowledge and skills of the staff providing treatment and support is crucial to their recovery. Rehabilitation programmes provide a much-needed framework to guide practitioners and help them organise and focus their recovery-oriented approach. In this editorial, we will provide a non-exhaustive overview of such rehabilitation programmes and interventions to illuminate the wide scope and practical usability of these interventions for this group of people with complex mental health problems.

The Rehabilitation Effectiveness for Activities for Life (REAL) study: a national programme of research into NHS inpatient mental health rehabilitation services across England

Background

The REAL (Rehabilitation Effectiveness for Activities for Life) research programme, funded by the National Institute for Heath Research (NIHR) from 2009 to 2015, investigated NHS mental health rehabiliation services across England. The users of these services are people with longer-term, complex mental health problems, such as schizophrenia, who have additional problems that complicate recovery. Although only around 10% of people with severe mental illness require inpatient rehabilitation, because of the severity and complexity of their problems they cost 25–50% of the total mental health budget. Despite this, there has been little research to help clinicians and commissioners to plan and deliver effective treatments and services. This research aimed to address this gap.

Methods

The programme had four phases. (1) A national survey, using quantitative and qualitative methods, was used to provide a detailed understanding of the scope and quality of NHS mental health rehabilitation services in England and the characteristics of those who use them. (2) We developed a training intervention for staff of NHS inpatient mental health rehabilitation units to facilitate service users’ activities. (3) The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the staff training programme was evaluated through a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 40 units that scored below average on our quality assessment tool in the national survey. A qualitative process evaluation and a realistic evaluation were carried out to inform our findings further. (4) A naturalistic cohort study was carried out involving 349 service users of 50 units that scored above average on our quality assessment tool in the national survey, who were followed up over 12 months. Factors associated with better clinical outcomes were investigated through exploratory analyses.

Results

Most NHS trusts provided inpatient mental health rehabilitation services. The quality of care provided was higher than that in similar facilities across Europe and was positively associated with service users’ autonomy. Our cluster trial did not find our staff training intervention to be clinically effective [coefficient 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) –1.35 to 4.24]; staff appeared to revert to previous practices once the training team left the unit. Our realistic review suggested that greater supervision and senior staff support could help to address this. Over half of the service users in our cohort study were successfully discharged from hospital over 12 months. Factors associated with this were service users’ activity levels [odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05] and social skills (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.24), and the ‘recovery’ orientation of the unit (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08), which includes collaborative care planning with service users and holding hope for their progress. Quality of care was not associated with costs of care. A relatively small investment (£67 per service user per month) was required to achieve the improvement in everyday functioning that we found in our cohort study.

Conclusions

People who require inpatient mental health rehabilitation are a ‘low-volume, high-needs’ group. Despite this, these services are able to successfully discharge most to the community within 18 months. Our results suggest that this may be facilitated by recovery-orientated practice that promotes service users’ activities and social skills. Further research is needed to identify effective interventions that enhance such practice to deliver these outcomes. Our research provides evidence that NHS inpatient mental health rehabilitation services deliver high-quality care that successfully supports service users with complex needs in their recovery.

Main limitation

Our programme included only NHS, non-secure, inpatient mental health rehabilitation services.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25898179.

Funding

The NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Defining an Occupational Therapy Intervention for People with Psychosis

The purpose of the study was to define occupational therapy in its entirety for people with psychotic conditions in community settings, in order to produce an intervention schedule for piloting in a randomised controlled trial. Initially, a draft schedule was designed using Creek's (2003) definition of occupational therapy as a complex intervention and other literature regarding psychosis. Consensus methods provided a systematic and transparent process for refining the schedule: the Delphi method was used with 20 local mental health occupational therapists followed by a modified nominal group technique with occupational therapists attending a national conference. This paper focuses on the process of gaining consensus and the practice-related issues that arose.

The results identified 82 components that detailed occupational therapy actions under 11 stages. The preferred approach was client centred, with models of practice, goals and actions chosen collaboratively with the individual client. Occupational therapy was defined as separate to care management but incorporated some generic tasks. The discussion of this study's implications includes setting a finite length of intervention; barriers to practice; the importance of activity analysis and doing activities together with clients; and how defining practice may help to clarify the role of the occupational therapist in multidisciplinary team work.

Occupational therapy in primary care: Results from a national survey: L'ergothérapie dans les soins primaires : Résultats d'un sondage national

BACKGROUND.

To support integration of occupational therapy in primary care and research in this area, it is critical to document examples of occupational therapy in primary care.

PURPOSE.

This study describes occupational therapy roles and models of practice used in primary care.

METHOD.

An electronic survey was sent to occupational therapists across Canada. Participants were identified using purposive and snowball sampling strategies. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data.

FINDINGS.

Respondents ( n = 52) were almost exclusively working on interprofessional teams. Intervention was provided most frequently to individual clients, and services were provided both within the home/community and in the clinic. Occupational therapists offered a range of health promotion and prevention services, predominantly to adults and older adults. A number of supports and barriers to the integration of occupational therapy were identified.

IMPLICATIONS.

A growing number of occupational therapists are working in primary care providing a broad range of services across the life span.

Clinical effectiveness of a staff training intervention in mental health inpatient rehabilitation units designed to increase patients' engagement in activities (the Rehabilitation Effectiveness for Activities for Life [REAL] study): single-blind, cluster-randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Mental health inpatient rehabilitation services focus on people with complex psychosis who have, for example, treatment-refractory symptoms, cognitive impairment, and severe negative symptoms, which impair functioning and require lengthy admission. Engagement in activities could lead to improvement in negative symptoms and function, but few trials have been done. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a staff training intervention to increase patients' engagement in activities.

METHODS

We did a single-blind, two-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial in 40 mental health inpatient rehabilitation units across England. Units were randomly allocated to either a manual-based staff training programme delivered by a small intervention team (intervention group, n=20) or standard care (control group, n=20). The primary outcome was patients' engagement in activities 12 months after randomisation, measured with the time use diary. With this measure, both the degree of engagement in an activity and its complexity are recorded four times a day for a week, rated on a scale of 0-4 for every period (maximum score of 112). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Random-effects models were used to compare outcomes between study groups. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by combining service costs with the primary outcome. This study is registered with Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN25898179).

FINDINGS

Patients' engagement in activities did not differ between study groups (coefficient 1·44, 95% CI -1·35 to 4·24). An extra £101 was needed to achieve a 1% increase in patients' engagement in activities with the study intervention.

INTERPRETATION

Our training intervention did not increase patients' engagement in activities after 12 months of follow-up. This failure could be attributable to inadequate implementation of the intervention, a high turnover of patients in the intervention units, competing priorities on staff time, high levels of patients' morbidity, and ceiling effects because of the high quality of standard care delivered. Further studies are needed to identify interventions that can improve outcomes for people with severe and complex psychosis.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research.

Activity groups for people with schizophrenia: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

UK guidelines recommend that patients with schizophrenia are offered access to social activities, however, the impact of such interventions have not been examined in a large randomized trial.

AIMS

To investigate the effect of an activity group intervention on mental health and global functioning 12 months after randomization compared to standard care alone.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from the MATISSE study. Primary outcomes were global functioning, assessed using the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), and mental health symptoms measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS).

RESULTS

About 140 participants were randomized to activity groups and 137 to standard care alone. Follow-up data were collected from 242 (87%) participants. Mental health improved significantly among those offered activity groups (change in PANSS score = -6.0, 95% CI -2.3 to -9.8) but global functioning did not (change in GAF score = 0.8, 95% CI -1.7 to 3.3). No significant differences were found between treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Offering activity groups to patients with schizophrenia was not associated with any additional clinical benefits. There was poor uptake and attendance at activity groups. Interventions that aim to improve negative symptoms may be useful in enabling engagement in psychosocial interventions.

Are Occupational Therapy Interventions for Service Users with Mental Health Problems Cost-Effective?

The current financial climate in health and social care is challenging: occupational therapists who work in mental health services need urgently to demonstrate clinical effectiveness and value for money in comparison to other interventions. In doing so they will help to ensure that service users in the United Kingdom can continue to benefit from occupational therapy interventions. In this opinion piece, a basic introduction to types of evaluation, costs and consequences is provided, as well as a description of research studies into the provision of occupational therapy for service users with mental health problems that include economic evaluations. Finally, methods to produce this vital information are suggested for practitioners, managers and researchers.

Study protocol: cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of a staff training intervention in inpatient mental health rehabilitation units in increasing service users' engagement in activities

BACKGROUND

This study focuses on people with complex and severe mental health problems who require inpatient rehabilitation. The majority have a diagnosis of schizophrenia whose recovery has been delayed due to non-response to first-line treatments, cognitive impairment, negative symptoms and co-existing problems such as substance misuse. These problems contribute to major impairments in social and everyday functioning necessitating lengthy admissions and high support needs on discharge to the community. Engagement in structured activities reduces negative symptoms of psychosis and may lead to improvement in function, but no trials have been conducted to test the efficacy of interventions that aim to achieve this.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study aims to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a staff training intervention to increase service users' engagement in activities. This is a single-blind, two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial involving 40 inpatient mental health rehabilitation units across England. Units are randomised on an equal basis to receive either standard care or a "hands-on", manualised staff training programme comprising three distinct phases (predisposing, enabling and reinforcing) delivered by a small team of psychiatrists, occupational therapists, service users and activity workers. The primary outcome is service user engagement in activities 12 months after randomisation, assessed using a standardised measure. Secondary outcomes include social functioning and costs and cost-effectiveness of care.

DISCUSSION

The study will provide much needed evidence for a practical staff training intervention that has potential to improve service user functioning, reducing the need for hospital treatment and supporting successful community discharge. The trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials (Ref ISRCTN25898179).

Primary-care based participatory rehabilitation: users' views of a horticultural and arts project

BACKGROUND

Participation in horticulture and arts may improve wellbeing in those with mental and physical illness.

AIM

To conduct an in-depth exploration of the views and experience of participants of a primary-care-based horticultural and participatory arts rehabilitation project (Sydenham Garden).

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative interview study of a primary-care-based horticultural and participatory arts rehabilitation project in South London.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 participants (referred to as 'coworkers') of Sydenham Garden. Seven were female. Participants were aged between 38 and 91 years and had a range of severe mental and physical health problems; most had depression. The interviews were analysed using constant comparison and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Data were overwhelmingly positive concerning participation. Coworkers considered participation in the project to promote wellbeing by providing purposeful and enjoyable activity and interest, improving mood and self-perceptions, and providing an escape from life's pressures. Being outdoors was considered therapeutic. The most-valued aspect of participation was the social contact derived as a result of it. Many of the coworkers who were interviewed developed transferable skills, including nationally recognised qualifications, which they valued highly.

CONCLUSION

Delivery of horticultural therapy and participatory arts is a feasible model for improving wellbeing in patients in primary care who have serious illness. Longer-term studies are needed to address what happens to people after leaving such projects.

Variables associated with general practitioners taking on serious mental disorder patients

BACKGROUND

As part of community-based initiatives to strengthen integrated care and promote patient recovery, GPs are asked to play a greater part in treating serious mental disorder (SMD) patients. All current healthcare reforms favour the reinforcement of primary care. More information on enhancing the role of GPs in mental health would benefit policymakers, especially as regards SMD patients, where little research has been published as yet. This article assesses variables associated with GPs taking on SMD patients.

METHODS

The study, encompassing multiple sites, is based on a sample of 398 GPs, representative of the GP population in the Canadian province of Quebec. GPs were asked to answer a 143-item questionnaire on their socio-demographic and clinical practice profiles, patient characteristics, perceived inter-professional relationships and quality of care. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Our data highlighted that GPs currently followed up only a minority of SMD patients on a continuous basis and far fewer for both physical and mental health problems. A linear regression model that accounts for 43% of the variance was generated. The best variables associated positively with GPs taking on SMD patients were: frequency of referrals for joint follow-up with other resources, and involvement in post-hospitalization follow-up. Conversely, lack of expertise in mental health (related in our model to frequency of mental disorder patient transfer due to insufficient mental health training) is associated with a lower incidence of GPs taking on patients.

CONCLUSION

As advocated in current healthcare reforms, our study confirms the need to promote greater GP involvement in integrated care models and enhance their training in mental health--thereby helping to reverse the trend among GPs of transferring SMD patients to specialized care. Patients with stable SMDs ought to have the same care access as the general population.

What Helps and Hinders People with Psychotic Conditions Doing What They Want in Their Daily Lives

It is important for people to do what they want in their daily lives and this is embedded in concepts of recovery, rehabilitation, social inclusion and quality of life. To research what helps and hinders people with psychotic conditions to do what they want, 24 people already engaged in a trial of occupational therapy were interviewed by a service user researcher. The qualitative methods used framework analysis.

The findings described what the participants appreciated about occupational therapy and how other workers sometimes delivered occupational therapy type interventions. As well as therapy, multifarious factors appeared to have an impact on people's choices and actions and these reiterated the findings from prior studies. These internal and external factors combined in complex relationships. People felt particularly vulnerable when staff behaved uncaringly and with disrespect because this replicated past traumas, stigmatisation and rejection. The participants revealed how important it was for staff to pitch their interventions right for them at the time.

The study led to suggestions that occupational therapists refine their artistry in order to hone their interventions to suit the individual, follow guidance on developing therapeutic relationships and recovery-focused capabilities, enhance caring by getting support themselves and employ critical thinking to challenge organisational barriers and their profession's rhetoric.

Occupational therapy for people with psychotic conditions in community settings: a pilot randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effectiveness of a long established intervention, occupational therapy for people with psychotic conditions, and to inform future research designs.

DESIGN

A pilot randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Two community mental health teams in a UK city.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-four adults with schizophrenia or other psychotic conditions, and functional problems.

INTERVENTIONS

Twelve months of individualized occupational therapy in community settings, as an adjunct to usual care and compared to treatment as usual. A two to one randomization ratio was used in favour of occupational therapy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Social Functioning Scale, Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms and employment.

RESULTS

Both groups' scores on Social Functioning Scale and Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms showed significant improvement over 12 months. The Social Functioning Scale overall mean difference for occupational therapy was 2.33, P=0.020 and for treatment as usual was 6.17, P=0.023. The Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms total mean difference for occupational therapy was -16.25, P<0.001 and for treatment as usual was -17.36, P= 0.011. There were no differences between the two groups on any of the outcome measures. After 12 months the occupational therapy group showed clinically significant improvements that were not apparent in the control group. These were in four subscales of the Social Functioning Scale: relationships, independence performance, independence competence and recreation. Out of 30 people receiving occupational therapy those with a clinical level of negative symptoms reduced from 18 (64%) to 13 (46%), P=0.055.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggested that individualized occupational therapy may contribute to recovery but more focus is recommended on people's cognitive abilities and employment.