Rachel Proffitt1. 1. Rachel Proffitt, OTD, OTR/L, is Assistant Professor, Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Missouri, Columbia; proffittrm@health.missouri.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe current occupational therapy practices in the usage and prescription of and clinical reasoning process supporting home exercise programs (HEPs) for clients with neurological injuries (CWNIs). METHOD: A survey was distributed via mail to 2,000 members of the American Occupational Therapy Association. The survey questions concerned basic demographics, current HEP practices, and attitudes toward using HEPs with CWNIs. RESULTS: In the 360 returned surveys, occupational therapists reported numerous benefits of using HEPs and were able to clearly articulate their clinical reasoning. Commonly reported HEP activities were preparatory in nature, and the most frequently prescribed dosage was 16-30 min daily. Most therapists relied on the same clinical reasoning process but varied in implementation methods. CONCLUSION: This study's results highlight the gaps between evidence and practice. The active ingredients in HEPs for CWNIs need to be more clearly defined and described.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe current occupational therapy practices in the usage and prescription of and clinical reasoning process supporting home exercise programs (HEPs) for clients with neurological injuries (CWNIs). METHOD: A survey was distributed via mail to 2,000 members of the American Occupational Therapy Association. The survey questions concerned basic demographics, current HEP practices, and attitudes toward using HEPs with CWNIs. RESULTS: In the 360 returned surveys, occupational therapists reported numerous benefits of using HEPs and were able to clearly articulate their clinical reasoning. Commonly reported HEP activities were preparatory in nature, and the most frequently prescribed dosage was 16-30 min daily. Most therapists relied on the same clinical reasoning process but varied in implementation methods. CONCLUSION: This study's results highlight the gaps between evidence and practice. The active ingredients in HEPs for CWNIs need to be more clearly defined and described.
Authors: Jacqueline C Outermans; Roland P S van Peppen; Harriet Wittink; Tim Takken; Gert Kwakkel Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2010-08-18 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: Anders Gustavsson; Mikael Svensson; Frank Jacobi; Christer Allgulander; Jordi Alonso; Ettore Beghi; Richard Dodel; Mattias Ekman; Carlo Faravelli; Laura Fratiglioni; Brenda Gannon; David Hilton Jones; Poul Jennum; Albena Jordanova; Linus Jönsson; Korinna Karampampa; Martin Knapp; Gisela Kobelt; Tobias Kurth; Roselind Lieb; Mattias Linde; Christina Ljungcrantz; Andreas Maercker; Beatrice Melin; Massimo Moscarelli; Amir Musayev; Fiona Norwood; Martin Preisig; Maura Pugliatti; Juergen Rehm; Luis Salvador-Carulla; Brigitte Schlehofer; Roland Simon; Hans-Christoph Steinhausen; Lars Jacob Stovner; Jean-Michel Vallat; Peter Van den Bergh; Peter Van den Bergh; Jim van Os; Pieter Vos; Weili Xu; Hans-Ulrich Wittchen; Bengt Jönsson; Jes Olesen Journal: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2011-09-15 Impact factor: 4.600
Authors: Catherine E Lang; Jillian R Macdonald; Darcy S Reisman; Lara Boyd; Teresa Jacobson Kimberley; Sheila M Schindler-Ivens; T George Hornby; Sandy A Ross; Patricia L Scheets Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 3.966