The Role of Occupational Therapy in Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programs: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic respiratory diseases are highly prevalent and compromise an individual's ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) and participate in meaningful life roles. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a well-established intervention aimed at restoring an individual's exercise capacity and improving their ability to complete their ADLs. Occupational therapists help individuals engage in meaningful "occupations," improving their health and well-being. Given the concordance in the aims of PR and the occupational therapy (OT) scope of practice, occupational therapists appear to be well suited as key players in PR programs. However, the benefits of adding OT to PR programs have been sparsely reported in the literature and the role of OT in PR has never been synthesized or reported in national and international guidelines. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to explore the role of OT in PR programs, the current guideline recommendations for the inclusion of OT in PR programs, the estimated prevalence of OT in PR programs, and the reported or anticipated effects of OT interventions in PR programs. METHODS: The review will be conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. A comprehensive search will be undertaken in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CINAHL (EBSCO) to identify and retrieve relevant literature published in English, French, or Portuguese. Gray literature on international OT association websites will also be identified, including position statements and guidelines relevant to PR programs. All literature published since the establishment of the effectiveness of PR for chronic respiratory disease in 1994 that explores OT in PR programs for these patients will be included. Search results will be exported to Covidence for title, abstract, and full-text screening by two independent reviewers. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers using a pilot-tested template including the following: the number of PR programs including OT (specifically from surveys), the purpose of the study, the study design, patient characteristics, respiratory conditions included, PR components, OT role, outcomes, and results. Findings will be presented using a narrative summary, supplemented by figures and/or tables. Key themes will be displayed in an infographic or schematic. RESULTS: The study was initiated in January 2021 and registered with the Open Science Framework (OSF) in February 2021, prior to title and abstract screening. Data collection and analysis and drafting of the manuscript will occur throughout 2021, with expected publication in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this scoping review will help health care professionals improve patient care by broadening their understanding and awareness of the role of OT in PR programs. This role clarification may help to inform program development and clinical decision making and will serve to optimize the delivery of multidisciplinary care for patients in PR programs, ultimately improving patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF Registries ZH63W; https://osf.io/zh63w. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/30244.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".