MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7042454405

An overview of barriers, facilitators, and themes associated with occupational therapy practice in Canada

2022· dissertation· en· W7042454405 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2022
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOccupational therapyOccupational health nursingInclusion (mineral)Occupational safety and healthHealth carePrimary care
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background To advance occupational therapy practice, we need to understand factors that support and hinder occupational therapists’ engagement in health services and better understand how occupational therapy is being represented in practice. With respect to factors that support and hinder occupational therapy practice, the first objective of this thesis was to identify barriers and facilitators to the integration of occupational therapists into primary care services in Canada and provide recommendations from the literature supporting occupational therapist inclusion in primary care. With respect to understanding occupational therapy practice, the second objective of this thesis was to identify the roles/activities of occupational therapists present in the Canadian and Australian literature. Methods An environmental scan was conducted to address the first objective. Data were gathered from three sources: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus with Full Text (CINAHL), Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), and the Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapists (CJOT). For the second objective, an environmental scan and gap analysis were performed. Data for objective 2 were gathered from the database: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Plus with Full Text (CINAHL). Results With respect to the first objective, six barriers and three facilitators were found. The six barriers were: 1. a lack of understanding amongst health care professionals, policy makers and occupational therapists regarding an occupational therapist’s roles and services provided in primary care; 2. limited research involving an occupational therapist's integration within primary care; 3. a lack of funding for occupational therapy services within primary care; 4. a lack of understanding amongst health care professionals, politicians, and the public of the effectiveness of occupational therapy services; 5. a lack of shared understanding amongst occupational therapists regarding the distinction between primary care and primary health care; and 6. limited interactions between the primary care teams and occupational therapists. The three facilitators were: 1. occupational therapists’ engagement in interprofessional practice; 2. occupational therapists’ broad scope of practice (the generalist role); and 3. advocacy for occupational therapy roles in primary care. Regarding the second objective, Australia was identified as a comparison country for Canada. One hundred sixty-seven descriptors of occupational therapy roles/job titles/positions were identified in the Canadian and Australian literature and were categorized into nine themes for occupational therapy practice. These nine themes were: providing direct client care; leadership within the profession; liaison between client, family, and health professionals; occupational therapists providing education; research in occupational therapy; advocate for the client; professional practice; advocate for profession; and leadership outside the profession. Of these nine themes, the three most prevalent were: providing direct client care; leadership within the profession; and liaison between the client, family, and health professionals. Conclusions This thesis provides essential information that can be used to improve the utilization of occupational therapists working within Canada's primary care setting. Interprofessional practice is an essential facilitator to the integration of occupational therapists within primary care. It is essential to foster understanding of occupational therapy practice amongst the public, other health professionals, and occupational therapists as this will be vital to occupational therapists’ inclusion in health care practice. Moreover, advocating for the profession and educating others on occupational therapy practice is vital for occupational therapists both within and outside of practice. Increasing health professionals' exposure to occupational therapists’ roles and services within primary care, is necessary to foster a greater understanding of how occupational therapists fit within primary care. Occupational therapy research, advocacy, leadership, and interprofessional practice are essential resources for creating awareness and understanding regarding the profession’s roles and scope of practice. This work draws attention to occupational therapy roles/activities represented in the Canadian and Australian literature. Based on our research, there are several opportunities for occupational therapists to increase awareness amongst the general public, health professionals, and politicians regarding occupational therapy roles and services in Canada primary care. These opportunities involve occupational therapists directly addressing key barriers and facilitators to occupational therapist integration into practice.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,153
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,982

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,026
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0100,027
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0200,006
Communication savante0,0080,002
Science ouverte0,0030,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,335
Écart entre enseignants0,293 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)→Même sujetOccupational Therapy Practice and Research→Travaux en français237 207→