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.

Examining utility and feasibility of implementing patient-reported outcome measures in occupational therapy primary care practice

Introduction

Occupational therapists are increasingly part of interprofessional primary care teams, helping to expand primary care to meet client needs. Effectiveness of occupational therapy services is difficult to determine with currently collected data, and little is known about the best tools to use or how to integrate tools into practice. We explored the utility and feasibility of implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) within occupational therapy primary care practice.

Method

We integrated pre-test/post-test and exploratory qualitative designs. Over 7 months, nine occupational therapists administered two PROMs to clients receiving falls prevention services, addressing falls efficacy and participation in daily occupations. Subsequent interviews with therapists explored the utility and feasibility of using the tools. We assessed pre-to-post change in PROM scores and thematically analyzed interview data.

Results

The occupational therapists valued measuring function and participation in daily occupations to inform practice, communicate with team members, and demonstrate effectiveness. The falls efficacy scale appeared to capture change over time and was feasible to implement at pre-test.

Conclusion

PROMs appear useful within occupational therapy primary care falls prevention services and can be feasible with attention to administration processes. Further development and testing of PROMs is needed to support occupational therapy primary care practice.

Systematic review of determinants influencing knowledge implementation in occupational therapy

INTRODUCTION

In knowledge translation, implementation strategies are more effective in fostering practice change. When using these strategies, however, many determinants, such as individual or organisational factors, influence implementation. Currently, there is a lack of synthesis concerning how these determinants influence knowledge implementation (KI). The aim of this systematic review was to document how determinants influence KI outcomes with occupational therapists.

METHOD

Following the PRISMA statement, we systematically reviewed the literature on KI in occupational therapy across 12 databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, FirstSearch, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, ERIC, Education Source and Sociological Abstracts. Eligible studies reported KI strategies specifically with occupational therapists. Selected studies were appraised for quality with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we categorised reported mentions of CFIR (sub-)constructs to identify the determinants studied most often, how they were documented and what influence they had on outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were analysed for this review. CFIR (sub-)constructs were mentioned 81 times, and seven (sub-)constructs received at least 5% of these mentions (4/81). These were as follows: (i) Adaptability of the practice; (ii) Learning climate; (iii) Leadership engagement; (iv) Available resources; (v) Knowledge and Beliefs about the Intervention; (vi) Individual Stage of Change; and vii) Executing the KI strategy. The Inner setting domain was the most documented and the domain with the most (sub-)constructs with at least four mentions (3/7). Most studies used questionnaires as assessment tools, but these were mainly non-standardised scales. The data were too heterogenous to perform a meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Seven (sub-)constructs mentioned most often would benefit from being assessed for salience by researchers intending to develop a KI strategy for occupational therapists. Future research aimed at improving our understanding of KI should also consider using standardised tools to measure the influence of determinants.