#OTalk Research 2nd April 2019

This weeks #OTalk is hosted by Dr. Rob Brooks, Course Director for Occupational Therapy at Leeds Beckett University. As his blog below outlines, Rob has based this week’s chat questions on feedback from pre-registration students on their experiences of research. Join Rob on Tuesday 2nd Aril at 8pm to discuss your thoughts on this topic.

Pre-registration Research “Never again!”

We would not argue with the notion that occupational therapists need to be able to interpret research and apply this to their practice. Most occupational therapists have received some research training; indeed, the Royal College of Occupational Therapists standard for pre-registration education states that an entry level therapist should be able to:

  1. Select and justify designs, methods and ethics appropriate to research in occupation and occupational therapy.
  2. Disseminate research findings in a variety of appropriate ways within and beyond the profession.

Despite research being embedded in pre-registration education, engagement with research in clinical practice is variable and the number of researchers in the profession remains limited. The reasons for this are complex, I would suggest that how students experience research in pre-registration programmes is a contributing factor.

There is little published research on the experience of research by pre-registration students. When I think about what pre-registration occupational therapy students have told me about their experiences they fit into two groups. The first is the “never again!” group. This group find the process of conducting research tortuous and they often struggle to feel skilled in using research in their practice. I worry that we have alienated this group of students from research. The reasons for this can be multi-factorial – was it the way in which research was taught, was it the type of study they carried out, was it difficulty in applying the research to practice? Each student will have their own story.

The second group is those who like research (yes, there are some!). These are the students who find research stimulating and engaging. I do however have concerns about these students too. These students are skilled in research and have the potential to be the future researchers of the profession, yet when they go into graduate jobs we fail to use or nurture their research skills. Again, we can deconstruct a number or reasons – senior staff who themselves feel threatened by research knowledge, lack of opportunity/time to carry out further research, the perception that research is for senior therapists.

Question 1
What were your experiences of pre-registration research?

Question 2
Is pre-registration research actually useful?

Question 3
What could universities do differently to make research more accessible/enjoyable for pre-registration students?

Question 4
What types of research should pre-registration students be conducting?

Question 5
How can clinicians/managers use the research skills of new graduates?

Question 6
What should clinicians and academics do to talent spot potential future researchers?

Post Chat

Host: Dr. Rob Brooks

Online Transcript

The Numbers

1.532M Impressions
402 Tweets
46 Participants
142 Avg Tweets/Hour
Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants

Data for #OTalk can be up to 15 minutes delayed

 

#OTalk – 26th March 2019 The Intentional Relationship Model.

This weeks chat will be all about the The Intentional Relationship Model and host by Carolina Cordero @Colourful_OT

The Intentional Relationship Model (Taylor, 2008) outlines the process by which occupational therapists build therapeutic relationships with the people we work with. It looks at therapist-client interactions in terms of factors including the client’s interpersonal characteristics (of which there are 12 types) and the “inevitable interpersonal events” that can occur during the therapy process (of which there are 11). The model also describes six “modes” in which occupational therapists relate to and engage with their clients:

  • Advocating
  • Collaborating
  • Empathizing
  • Encouraging
  • Instructing
  • Problem-solving

The Intentional Relationship Model, as its name suggests, emphasises the need for therapeutic use of self to be something that occupational therapists engage in deliberately, giving careful consideration to which mode we use with which client and in response to which situation. This presents an interesting viewpoint on therapeutic use of self, which can often be nebulous and difficult to define, as a skill that can be broken down into a deliberate process of interpersonal reasoning. However, is it overly reductionist to view the therapeutic relationship in this way? Are there interpersonal characteristics, interpersonal events and therapeutic modes outside of those defined by the model? All questions worth asking in tonight’s #OTalk!

Tonight’s questions are:

1. Have you come across the Intentional Relationship Model (IRM) before? If not, what is your first impression of it?

2. What is your own preferred therapeutic mode? (questionnaire available here: https://irm.ahslabs.uic.edu/assessments/)

3. Do you feel that the IRM accurately describes therapeutic use of self in OT?

4. Do you think the IRM could be a good tool for teaching interpersonal skills to OT students?

Taylor, R. R. (2008). The intentional relationship: Occupational therapy and use of self. Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis.

Post Chat

Host: Carolina Cordero @Colourful_OT

OTalk Support: @kirstieot

Online Transcript

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript March 26th 2019

The Numbers

801.692K Impressions
170 Tweets
53 Participants
Avg Tweets/Hour
Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants

Data for #OTalk can be up to 15 minutes delayed

 

19th March 2019 #OTalk Gaming a meaningful occupation or a Damaging occupation?

This week our very own Rachel Booth @otrach will be hosting a chat looking at gaming a meaningful occupation or a Damaging occupation?

In 2018 the World Health Organisation added gaming disorder to its list of mental health conditions.

It stated

‘Gaming disorder is characterised by a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour (‘digital gaming’ or ‘video-gaming’), which may be online (i.e., over the internet) or offline.

Manifested by: 

  1. impaired control over gaming (e.g., onset, frequency, intensity, duration, termination, context); 
  2. 2) increasing priority given to gaming to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other life interests and daily activities; 
  3. Continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences. 

The behaviour pattern is of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning. 

The pattern of gaming behaviour may be continuous or episodic and recurrent. 

The gaming behaviour and other features are normally evident over a period of at least 12 months in order for a diagnosis to be assigned, although the required duration may be shortened if all diagnostic requirements are met and symptoms are severe.’

What I thought was interesting about this definition was the use of occupation functioning.

So for this week’s #OTalk I through it might be interesting to explore the use of this occupation, as a treatment tool and how as an occupational therapist we might work with someone who is given this diagnosis.

Question 1 

Do you game? If so what type and why?

Question 2

How much time do you spend gaming in an average week? 

Question 3 

What are you thoughts on the world health organisation adding addiction to gaming as category of mental disorder?  

Question 4

Do you used gaming, as an intervention/treatment? If so how and why?

Question 5

How might an occupational therapist work with someone who’s gaming behaviour pattern is of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment occupational functioning?

Question 6 

On the whole do you feel Gaming is a meaningful or damaging occupation?

Ref 

https://www.who.int/features/qa/gaming-disorder/en/

POST CHAT

Host: Rachel Booth @OT_rach

Support on OTalk account: @Colourful_OT

Online Transcript

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript March 19th 2019

The Numbers

980.895K Impressions
323 Tweets
29 Participants
162 Avg Tweets/Hour
11 Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants

Data for #OTalk can be up to 15 minutes delayed

 

12th March #OTalk –   Mental Health Occupational Therapy outcomes in clinical practice and how to measure them.

This Tuesday  Emma Hall, Mary Birken, Mandy Graham and Sophie Faulkner host  #OTalk –   Mental Health Occupational Therapy outcomes in clinical practice and how to measure them.

Measuring the outcomes of mental health occupational therapy interventions is vital to demonstrate changes or improvements for people using our services, and the contribution of occupational therapy in meeting the objectives of clinical services, and assuring quality.

HCPC state in their standards of proficiency for occupational therapists, that they must:

“be able to evaluate intervention plans using recognised outcome measures and revise the plans as necessary in conjunction with the service user” (HCPC, 2013)

Despite this, there are no recent published papers regarding mental health occupational therapy outcome measurement in the last five years, to guide best practice. Studies indicate that  outcome measurement is not routine practice (Birken, Couch and Morley, 2018; Morley, 2014). There is debate over which outcomes should we measure in occupational therapy clinical practice in mental health. How do we ensure outcome measurement tools used are meaningful and important to those using the service and the service?

This Otalk aims to generate discussion about what outcomes of occupational therapy interventions in mental health are important to service users and the clinical services, and how we should measure these and report these.

1) Why is it important to measure outcomes within occupational therapy?

2) What are the challenges to using outcome measures within mental health practice?

3)What outcome measures are you currently using?

4) How can we ensure that outcome measurement is client centred and meaningful?

5)How can we  demonstrate  that occupational therapy outcomes contribute to the service objectives?

References:

Birken, M., Couch, E. and Morley, M. (2017) Barriers and facilitators of participation in intervention research by mental health occupational therapists British Journal of Occupational Therapy 80 (9): 568-572.

Health and Care Professions Council (2013) The standards of proficiency for occupational therapists.

Morley, M. (2014) Evidencing What Works: Are Occupational Therapists Using Clinical Information Effectively? British Journal of Occupational Therapy 77 (12) 601-604.

 

Post Chat

Host: Emma Hall, @Emm_OT  Mary Birken, @MaryBirken Mandy Graham @MandyGrahamOT and Sophie Faulkner @sleepOTsophie

Support on the OTalk account: Gill @gilliancrossley

Online Transcript

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript March 12th 2019

 

1.578M Impressions
460 Tweets
79 Participants
18 Avg Tweets/Hour
Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants