Identifying the characteristics of occupation-centred practice: A Delphi study

INTRODUCTION

Occupation-centred practice is key to aligning with the contemporary paradigm. Benefits of this approach for clients and the profession are well documented, yet how to identify occupation-centred practice is not yet understood. Therefore, this study aimed to uncover the characteristics of occupation-centred practice and how they can be identified in practice.

METHODS

A three round Delphi survey was conducted to gain consensus on the defining characteristics of occupation-centred practice. Purposive, convenience, and snowball sampling were used to distribute three survey rounds to occupational therapists internationally. Content analysis was used to create characteristics, descriptions, and examples of occupation-centred practice. Percentage agreement between occupational therapists were calculated to determine consensus.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 100 participants in round one, 89 in round two, and 70 in round three. Round one generated 12 characteristics that were refined and finalised into four defining characteristics, one of which had three subcharacteristics. The four characteristics are as follows: guided by theory and philosophy grounded in occupation, language and documentation promotes occupation among stakeholders, understanding and incorporating the person's context, and occupation as core to practice, which includes occupation in goal setting, assessment, and intervention. Descriptions and examples were generated for each characteristic.

CONCLUSION

This study presents valuable information for occupational therapists wanting to practise in an occupation-centred manner. The characteristics, descriptions, and examples provide a foundation upon which occupational therapists can understand and identify occupation-centred practice. Examples provided were highly influenced by factors including practice settings and preferred terminology. Future research will explore the creation of a tool for occupational therapists to evaluate their own practice against the characteristics to demonstrate areas of strength and for development.

Describing the occupational nature of practice: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Describing how occupation is used in practice can be challenging for occupational therapists. Occupation-centred, occupation-based, and occupation-focussed terminology are frequently used interchangeably and ambiguously to describe practice. However, ambiguous language creates confusion and inadequately demonstrates the value of occupation.

AIMS/OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to identify how occupation-centred, occupation-based, and occupation-focussed terminology are defined and represented in occupational therapy literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A five-step scoping review included papers published between 2014 and 2019 from four databases. Extracted data were summarised to outline how the terms were being used within the literature.

RESULTS

Initial searching yielded 819 articles and 35 papers met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Within current literature, occupation-focussed and occupation-based terminology were inconsistently described. A limited number of articles used occupation-centred and occupation-focussed terminology to describe practice, whilst occupation-based was more prominent. Occupation-based terminology was represented in numerous ways to describe assessments, practice tools, interventions, research, and theory. Discrepancies between the description and implementation of occupation-based practice were most prominent within interventions.

CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE

Findings demonstrated that occupation-based and occupation-focussed terminology were used interchangeably and inconsistently in literature. It is timely to consider how this is problematic for our professional identity and perceptions of occupation in practice.

Visually Impaired Infants Research Consortium (Viirc): First-Year Results

This article reports on a pilot study, conducted by the Visually Impaired Infants Research Consortium, of 21 developmental milestones achieved by 82 visually impaired children in New York City. Some delays in visual-motor activities were found, as well as differences in the sequence of acquiring skills. The subgroup of visually impaired children with multiple handicaps acquired milestones at a slower rate than did the subgroup of visually impaired children with no additional handicapping conditions.

Validating FMEA output against incident learning data: A study in stereotactic body radiation therapy

PURPOSE

Though failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is becoming more widely adopted for risk assessment in radiation therapy, to our knowledge, its output has never been validated against data on errors that actually occur. The objective of this study was to perform FMEA of a stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) treatment planning process and validate the results against data recorded within an incident learning system.

METHODS

FMEA on the SBRT treatment planning process was carried out by a multidisciplinary group including radiation oncologists, medical physicists, dosimetrists, and IT technologists. Potential failure modes were identified through a systematic review of the process map. Failure modes were rated for severity, occurrence, and detectability on a scale of one to ten and risk priority number (RPN) was computed. Failure modes were then compared with historical reports identified as relevant to SBRT planning within a departmental incident learning system that has been active for two and a half years. Differences between FMEA anticipated failure modes and existing incidents were identified.

RESULTS

FMEA identified 63 failure modes. RPN values for the top 25% of failure modes ranged from 60 to 336. Analysis of the incident learning database identified 33 reported near-miss events related to SBRT planning. Combining both methods yielded a total of 76 possible process failures, of which 13 (17%) were missed by FMEA while 43 (57%) identified by FMEA only. When scored for RPN, the 13 events missed by FMEA ranked within the lower half of all failure modes and exhibited significantly lower severity relative to those identified by FMEA (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

FMEA, though valuable, is subject to certain limitations. In this study, FMEA failed to identify 17% of actual failure modes, though these were of lower risk. Similarly, an incident learning system alone fails to identify a large number of potentially high-severity process errors. Using FMEA in combination with incident learning may render an improved overview of risks within a process.

TU-E-211-01: Establishing Multidisciplinary Collaboration as a Medical Physicist

Many medical physicists are scientists at heart and their career fulfillment includes a balance of clinical service and research development. Multidisciplinary collaboration is a great way for the medical physicists to advance science and technology of our fields and the fields of our collaborators. Cross-pollination among scientists of different fields has been the key for some of the most significant breakthroughs in science and medicine and produced some of the most rewarding experiences for the individuals involved. However, medical physicists face unique challenges in establishing multidisciplinary collaboration because our time and resources for research are often quite limited compared to basic scientists. Yet we medical physicists are uniquely positioned and have a tremendous opportunity to create/contribute to multidisciplinary research: our fields are already multidisciplinary in nature and hospital environment is problem rich. How do we establish and carry out research collaboration with scientists of other fields? How to balance research with your higher priority clinical service? How do you find the right multidisciplinary collaboration in your own environment? We will discuss the challenges, provide real exemplary solutions to the above questions, and offer advise to medical physicists who are interested in starting or improving their multidisciplinary collaboration. There are different kinds of multidisciplinary collaborations a medical physicist can create and participate at different involvement levels. Multidisciplinary collaboration is not for every medical physicist but for those who seek and devote time to it, the experience can be truly rewarding and the impact can be enormous.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

1. Learn the types of multidisciplinary collaboration medical physicists can created/participated 2. Learn the approaches and strategies to develop collaborations with scientists and professional of other fields3. Understand the challenges and different approaches to balance clinical service and multidisciplinary research collaboration.

WE-E-213AB-01: Medical Physics Challenges for Implementation of New Technologies in External Beam Radiotherapy

The AAPM has signed two formal Educational Exchange Agreements with the Spanish (SEFM) and the Russian (AMPR) medical physics societies. While the primary purpose of the Agreements is to provide educational opportunities for young medical physicists, the Agreements also contemplate holding joint sessions at scientific congresses. The purpose of this professional AAPM/SEFM/AMPR Joint Symposium is to explore the challenges that medical physicists in the three countries face when new external beam radiotherapy technologies are introduced in their facilities and to suggest potential solutions to limitations in testing equipment and lack of familiarity with protocols. Speakers from the three societies will present reviews of the technical aspects of IMRT, Arc EVIRT (IMAT/VMAT/Rapid Arc), SRS/SRBT, and IGRT/Adaptive radiotherapy, and will describe the status of these technologies in their countries, including the challenges found in tasks such as developing anatomical and biological dose optimization techniques and implementing QA management, risk assessment and patient safety programs. The SEFM will offer AAPM and AMPR members the possibility to participate in collaborative proposals for future research bids in UE and USA based on an ongoing Spanish project for adaptive radiotherapy using functional imaging. A targeted discussion will debate three propositions: the cost/benefit ratio of IGRT, whether IMRT requires IGRT, and the use of non-ionizing radiation technologies for realtime monitoring of prostate IGRT. For these debates, each society has designated one speaker to present and defend either "For" or "Against" the proposition, followed by discussion by all participants. The Symposium presentations and the country-tailored recommendations drawn will be made available to each society for inclusion in their websites. The WGNIMP, the AAPM Work Group charged with executing the AAPM/SEFM and AAPM/AMPR Agreements, will follow up on the commitments made by the AAPM.Di Yan's research on adaptive radiotherapy has been financially supported by: 1) NIH Research Grants, 2) Elekta Research Grants 3) Philips Research GrantConflicts of interest for Cedric X Yu: 1) Board Member of Prowess, Inc., 2) Shareholder of Xcision Medical Systems, LLC, 3) Inventor on patents licensed by Varian Medical Systems, Inc.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

1. Describe fundamental aspects for four advanced radiotherapy techniques: IMRT, IGRT, SBRT, and adaptive radiotherapy. 2. Review technical and professional challenges for implementation of advanced techniques as a function of resources and capabilities available within each scientific society: AAPM, SEFM, and AMPR. 3. Discuss and plan a proposal for an international trial on IMRT/IGRT based on functional imaging. 4. Debate important implementation aspects of IMRT and IGRT according to country-specific resources.