Tuesday 18th June 2019 – Reflections from #RCOT2019

This years Royal College of OT Conference is being held at the ICC in Birmingham on Monday 18th and Tuesday 19th June, 2019.  As always delegates are encourage to share their learning and impressions of conference on twitter using #RCOT2019, so if you not at the conference you can still join in the learning.   As most of the #OTalk crew will at this years conference our student intern Carolina will be leading the chat reflecting on what happened, for those travels home or those who joined in the conference via Twitter.

Question will include

Q1 Did you attend this years RCOT conference or follow it on Twitter?

Q2. What was your highlight?

Q3. Will you be changing your practice at all after something you saw or read on Twitter at the conference?

Q4. Did you meet anyone in real life that you only knew on Twitter? How was that?

Q5.  Is there anyone you think we should approach to host a #OTalk chat that you saw at conference?

Q6. What is your take home message?

POST CHAT

Host and OTalk support- Carolina

Online Transcript

#OTalk Transcript June 18th 2019

The Numbers

1.188M Impressions
259 Tweets
69 Participants
10 Avg Tweets/Hour
Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants

Here are the OTalk Crew at this years Conference.

IMG_0028

Advertisements

#OTalk (Research), 7th May “Developing an Occupational Therapy Research Network”

This week’s #OTalk is hosted by the Royal College of Occupational Therapists (RCOT). The chat will be co-hosted by @TheRCOT and @DrGillianWard

As part of the development of a new RCOT vision, strategy and action plan for research and development that is fit to guide the profession’s progress and direction of travel over the next 10 years we’ve held 2 previous #OTalk chats to help inform and direct this work.

One of the key themes emerging from the R&D Review and a discussion point with several contributors was a real need to invest in building the occupational therapy research community and network, with the Royal College taking a strong lead in doing this for the profession. Currently, there is no opportunity for occupational therapy researchers to come together to develop a community of practice to share their passion for research and learn how to do it better. Our last #OTalk in September 2018 was focused on Creating a vibrant occupational therapy research community – the way forward. This led to an invited networking and think tank event held at RCOT at the beginning of April 2019 where we used a co-design approach to scope out the “feel, form and function” of an Occupational Therapy Research Network (OTRN).

The purpose of the RCOT OTRN is to support the development of a research community for networking, mentoring, information sharing and to advance research capability and capacity in the occupational therapy profession across the UK. It aims to enable occupational therapists to support each other to develop and use the research evidence base to improve services we are able to offer to the individuals, groups and communities we work with. How might it work? What would it do? We need your help to expand the discussion, and that’s what we’d like to chat with you about during the #OTalk.

We are really looking forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas, which will be a very welcome contribution to the development of the RCOT Occupational Therapy Research Network. If you get a chance ahead of the #OTalk session, it would be really helpful if you could give some thought to the type of network you’d want to join and what would help you engage with it. We’d really love to hear all of the creative ideas that you can come up with as we move into the development phase of the Occupational Therapy Research Network.

The questions forming the basis of our #OTalk discussion are:

1. How do we best support the aim of the network; to support each other to develop and use the research evidence base to improve services we are able to offer?”.  How might it work? What would it do?’
2. What would be the advantages of joining an RCOT Occupational Therapy Research Network? How can we encourage people to join?
3. Many people join networks, but how can we encourage active contribution and participation?
4. The OTRN is likely to be based around a virtual network, what should we consider when designing this?

 

Thank you, I look forward to chatting with you.

Gill Ward, Research and Development Manager, Royal College of Occupational Therapists.

Post Chat

Host: Gill Ward, @DrGillianWard  Research and Development Manager, Royal College of Occupational Therapists.

Otalk Support: @hooper_ek

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript May 7th 2019

Online Transcript

The Numbers

1.054 M Impressions
257 Tweets
26 Participants
206 Avg Tweets/Hour
10 Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#OTalk 30th April 2019 – The Equality Act 2010

equality-act-2010

The OTalk. Team thought it might a good for our CPD to explore and understand UK government, legislation and acts that might impacted on our practise or could inform our knowledge and understanding better,  over the year we will host a number of chat’s looking at these sort of documents,  Please do suggest some for future chats.  

This week Rachel Booth aka @otrach will host a chat, looking at the Equality Act 2010 which cover all areas of the UK however both Scotland and Wales has devotion rights and you can find out more about them at below links.  

I’m not an expert on the equality act but here is a brief over,  and below are the questions that I will be asking during the chat,  followed by a reflect log to fill in after the chat that you can use as some evidence you have engaged in some CDP.

The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society.

It replaced previous anti-discrimination laws with a single Act, making the law easier to understand and strengthening protection in some situations. It sets out the different ways in which it’s unlawful to treat someone.

It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of:

  • age
  • gender reassignment
  • being married or in a civil partnership
  • being pregnant or on maternity leave
  • disability
  • race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
  • religion or belief
  • sex
  • sexual orientation

These are called ‘protected characteristics’.

You’re protected from discrimination:

  • at work
  • in education
  • as a consumer
  • when using public services
  • when buying or renting property
  • as a member or guest of a private club or association

You’re legally protected from discrimination by the Equality Act 2010.

You’re also protected from discrimination if:

  • you’re associated with someone who has a protected characteristic, for example a family member or friend
  • you’ve complained about discrimination or supported someone else’s case.

You can do something voluntarily to help people with a protected characteristic. This is called ‘positive action’.

Taking positive action is legal if people with a protected characteristic:

  • are at a disadvantage
  • have particular needs
  • are under-represented in an activity or type of work

Disability and the Equity Act

You’re disabled under the Equality Act 2010 if you have a physical or mental impairment that has a ‘substantial’ and ‘long-term’ negative effect on your ability to do normal daily activities.

  • ‘substantial’ is more than minor or trivial, eg it takes much longer than it usually would to complete a daily task like getting dressed
  • ‘long-term’ means 12 months or more, eg a breathing condition that develops as a result of a lung infection

There are special rules that apply to fluctuating conditions. eg arthritis.

Discrimination can come in one of the following forms:

  • direct discrimination – treating someone with a protected characteristic less favourably than others
  • indirect discrimination – putting rules or arrangements in place that apply to everyone, but that put someone with a protected characteristic at an unfair disadvantage
  • harassment – unwanted behaviour linked to a protected characteristic that violates someone’s dignity or creates an offensive environment for them
  • victimisation – treating someone unfairly because they’ve complained about discrimination or harassment

It can be lawful to have specific rules or arrangements in place, as long as they can be justified.

More detail at https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/how-you-can-be-discriminated-against 

Questions during the chat 

  1. Before tonights chat what was you knowledge and understanding of the equity act?
  2. Ok over to you now all please ask one question to hopefully further your knowledge and understanding (everyone is welcome to answer)
  3. How if at all do you think this act impacts on or influences you’re clinical practise?
  4. Is there anything not cover by the act that you think should be considered for future updates of the act?
  5. How can we as occupational therapist influence future acts of parliament?
  6. Don’t forget to fill in the reflective log and do you have any suggestions for future chats about government Policy, legislation and or acts.

Link to Scottish act https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-governments-equality-duties/

Link to welsh act http://www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2011/1064/pdfs/wsi_20111064_mi.pdf

References 

 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance#history

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/pdfs/ukpga_20100015_en.pdf

Equality Act 2010

POST CHAT

Host and OTalk Support: @otrach

Online Transcript

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript April 30th 2019

The Numbers

1.542M Impressions
227 Tweets
23 Participants
182 Avg Tweets/Hour
10 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

#OTalk 29th January 2019 – What drivers and barriers affect final transition point of final year student to newly qualified occupational therapists?

This week Emma (@emmaspellmanOT) wants some help with her PhD research:

I am an Occupational Therapy lecturer, PhD student and volunteer member of the Royal College of Occupational Therapists (RCOT) North West Regional Committee.

Since my own BSc study in occupational therapy, I’ve been interested in what drivers and barriers affect that final transition point of final year student to newly qualified occupational therapists.  Subsequently I’m currently doing doctoral research into this subject which will build on current research that indicates factors of professional socialisation, knowledge/skills acquisition and teaching/learning styles/behaviours. There is a gap in the current UK literature which is the combination of voices of student, educator and lecturer.

Questions for consideration:

Question 1: What does being ‘prepared for practice’ mean to you?

Question 2: Who is involved in preparing students to be able to practice and please give an example if you can?

Question 3: How you have successfully achieved preparedness for practice as a student or how you might have helped a student achieve this?

Question 4: What key challenges or barriers do you feel there are to a final year occupational therapy student feeling prepared for practice?

Question 5: What else could be done to improve preparing students to practice?  

Participation in this OTalk chat doesn’t make you a research participant in my study. However, please would you consider my using your tweets for analysis of the OTtalk transcript?  If you do consider this, please be assured of anonymity.  Those among you familiar to OTalk will know that you can choose anonymity if you wish. You might already protect your own anonymity on your twitter accounts and you can protect your tweets from whomever you wish.   I will ensure anonymity in the write up of the pilot study. There is a possibility of participants being identifiable from any quotes used within the final write up of the research, however, care will be taken within this to remove any identifiable information, including the use of pseudonyms and omitting any organisational information that may be included.

For those that may consider allowing me to use their tweets for my doctoral study, please view the documents linked below:

If you choose to allow me to use your tweets for my pilot doctoral study and so become a research participant,  please read the participant information form above and then the consent form, if you are still happy to be a research participant please sign the consent form and send this to : emma.spellman@cumbria.ac.uk.

Thank you in anticipation, Emma

Anyone interested in being a research participant in Emma’s study and allowing her to use their anonymised tweets should contact her directly on the e-mail address provided above.

Post Chat

Host: Emma (@emmaspellmanOT)

Support on @OTalk_ Account: @colourful_ot

Online Transcript

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript

151.489K Impressions
27 Tweets
13 Participants
25 Avg Tweets/Hour
Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants

 

#OTalk Research Tuesday 3rd July: Face validity: what is it, why is it important and how do we evaluate it?

This week’s chat is on the topic of Face validity and will be hosted by Dr Alison Laver-Fawcett, Associate Professor at York St John University (@alisonlaverfaw).  Here is what Alison had to say…

Face validity is the extent an assessment subjectively appears to test what it is supposed to; good face validity ensures an assessment is client-centred, acceptable to the test-taker, and to the person administering it (Asher 2007).

I conducted my first face validity study around 1990-1 when I was undertaking a project to develop, standardise and evaluate the psychometric properties of an assessment, the Structured Observational Test of Function (SOTOF), as the focus for my PhD studies. At the time I struggled to find face validity reported and discussed in occupational therapy literature. A key psychometric text I was drawing on at the time by Anastasi (1988) also had noted there was a “paucity of available research on face validity, despite its probable contribution to prevalent attitudes towards tests” (p. 145). The COSMIN checklist manual (Mokkink et al., 2012: 31) stated that no standards were developed for assessing face validity because ‘face validity requires a subjective judgement’, so unlike other types of validity and reliability, there is a lack of agreed standards for face validity studies

Years later when writing about validity for a text book I found there was still a lack of face validity studies published, not just in occupational therapy but also wider allied health assessment literature. This seems counter-intuitive as occupational therapists are supposed to be client centred; so why aren’t we studying the face validity of occupational therapy assessments and outcome measures as a matter of routine? Do we really think that it doesn’t matter what our clients’ experiences of undertaking an assessment is? Or what they think about what is being assessed /measured and how the assessment is done?

In the last few years I have been undertaking work with occupational therapy students exploring the face validity of a couple of measures. For example, in the final year ‘Dissertation: Contributing to the Evidence base’ module on the Occupational Therapy Programme at York St John University, some small groups of students have been collaborating to undertake face validity studies on the Activity Card Sort – United Kingdom version (e.g. see Laver-Fawcett et al, 2016). This year students have explored the face validity of the SOTOF (2nd edition) with community living older people and a MSc by Research student is exploring the face validity of SOTOF (2nd ed) with people in an in-patient setting who have neurological conditions such as stroke.

In this chat we will explore what face validity is and how it is defined; we will debate whether it is important for occupational therapy researchers to consider face validity (both when developing and evaluating measures and when selecting outcome measures for research); and we will discuss methodology for evaluating and exploring face validity.

Whether you are an experienced researcher, a clinician or a student please join us on 2nd May for this #OTalk twitter chat and share your ideas and experience. It is never too early in your occupational therapy career to start engaging in the development and evaluation of occupational therapy assessments and outcome measures.

Suggested talking points and discussion questions to focus our chat:

  1. What do you understand by the term ‘face validity’? Do you have any definitions that you have found useful?
  2. Why is face validity important to study when developing or selecting occupational therapy assessments and outcome measures?
  3. When selecting an outcome measure for research how could you consider face validity?
  4. Have you ever undertaken research to evaluate the face validity of an assessment or outcome measure? How did you do this?
  5. What methodologies can be used to explore and evaluate face validity?

References

Asher I.E. (2007) Occupational Therapy Assessment Tools: An annotated index. 3rd ed. Bethesda, American Occupational Therapy Association.

Laver-Fawcett A J, Brain L, Brodie C, Cardy L, Manaton L (2016) The Face Validity and Clinical Utility of the Activity Card Sort – United Kingdom (ACS-UK). British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 79(8) 492–504. doi:10.1177/0308022616629167. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0308022616629167 (accessed 25th June 2018).

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM and de Vet HCW (2012) COSMIN checklist manual. Available at: http://www.cosmin.nl/images/upload/files/COSMIN%20checklist%20manual%20v9.pdf (accessed 25 June 2018).

Post chat

Chat host : Dr Alison Laver-Fawcett @alisonlaverfaw

On OTalk account for support: Dr Jenny Preston @preston_jenny

Online transcript

#OTalk Healthcare Social Media Transcript July 3rd 2018

The Numbers

1.300MImpressions
316Tweets
22Participants
253Avg Tweets/Hour
14Avg Tweets/Participant

#OTalk Participants