No abstract

Objective: To evaluate cross-regional validity of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) with a specific focus on valid use with Middle Europeans. Design: Descriptive cross-regional validation study. Participants: A total of 1346 participants from Middle Europe and 144,143 participants from North America, UK/ Ireland, the Nordic Countries, other Europe, Australia/New Zealand and Asia, between the ages of 3 and 103 years, in good health and with a variety of diagnoses, were selected from the AMPS database. Methods: Many-facet Rasch analysis was used to analyse participant raw data, and effect sizes were used to evaluate for differential item functioning. Evaluation for differential test functioning was also implemented. Results: None of the 20 activity of daily living process items, and only one of the activity of daily living motor items demonstrated differential item functioning. The activity of daily living motor item Aligns exceeded the significant effect size criterion of ± 0.55 logit, but the significant differential item functioning did not lead to differential test functioning (i.e. all measures fell within the 95% confidence bands). Conclusion:This study provides further evidence of validity of the AMPS when used to evaluate quality of activity of daily living tasks performance across world regions. The AMPS measures can be used as objective indices of activity of daily living ability in rehabilitation settings and in international collaborative research related to activity of daily living task performance.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic impedes therapy and care activities. Tele-health, i.e., the provision of health care at a distance (HCD), is a promising way to fill the supply gap. However, facilitators and barriers influence the use and experience of HCD for occupational therapists (OTs) and midwives. We identified use of services and appraisal of experiences of Switzerland-based OTs and midwives regarding the provision of HCD during the lockdown as it pertains to the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020. 1. Hypothesis: Profession, age in years, and area of work have a significant and meaningful influence over whether HCD is provided. 2. Hypothesis: Profession, age in years, area of work, possibility of reimbursement by health insurance, and application used have a significant and meaningful influence on the experience of HCD. Methods In a cross-sectional survey, 5755 OTs and midwives were contacted to fill out an online questionnaire with 13 questions regarding demographic information, use of HCD, and experiences while providing the service. Eleven potential facilitators and barriers and areas where there was desire for support were identified. Results The questionnaire was completed by 1269 health professionals (response rate 22.5%). 73.4% of responding OTs (n = 431) and midwives (n = 501) provided HCD during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. Profession and area of work had a significant influence on whether HCD was provided. Age only had a significant influence on the use of videotelephony, SMS, and chat services. OTs experienced HCD significantly more positively than midwives (log odds = 1.3; p ≤ .01). Video-telephony (log odds = 1.1; p ≤ .01) and use of phone (log odds = 0.8; p = .01) were positive predictors for positive experience, while use of SMS (log odds = − 0.33; p = .02) was a negative predictor. Among OTs, 67.5% experienced HCD as positive or mostly positive, while 27.0% experienced it as negative or mostly negative. Among midwives, 39.5% experienced it as positive or mostly positive, while 57.5% experienced it as negative or mostly negative. Most respondents desired support concerning reimbursement by health insurance (70.8%), followed by law and data protection (60.4%). Conclusions HCD during the early COVID-19 pandemic was generally perceived as positive by OTs and midwives. There is need for training opportunities in connection with HCD during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This study confirms earlier data and supports the effectiveness of interprofessional rehabilitation for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

These findings support the validity of the AMPS measures when used to identify ADL problems among children with mild disabilities.

The AMPS remains free of relevant differences in mean ADL ability measures between Middle Europe and other world regions, indicating that the international age-normative mean values are likely to be applicable to children from Middle Europe. The AMPS can be used internationally to evaluate ADL performance in children and to determine if the child is eligible for occupational therapy services.

BACKGROUND: A deeper understanding of how contextual factors affect the ability to participate in the life area of work and employment despite chronic musculoskeletal pain is needed as a basis for interprofessional rehabilitation programs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate which contextual factors influence rehabilitation program clients’ ability to participate in the life area of work and employment, and how they do this. METHODS: Nested case study using a realist evaluation framework of interprofessional interventions. Qualitative content analysis of problem-centered interviews to identify influential context-mechanism-outcome configurations. RESULTS: We identified several important context-mechanism-outcome configurations. In the pre-interventional phase, socioeconomic and environmental factors affected two mechanisms, “exhaustion” and “discrimination”. In the intra-interventional phase, the social skills of health professionals and opportunities for discussion with peers affected the ability of program participants to engage with program content. In the post-intervention phase, volitional competences of the social system affected the sustainable application of program content in everyday life. CONCLUSION: The identified context-mechanism-outcome configurations shows that the ability to participate in the life area of work is interdependent with the ability to participate in other areas of life. In practice and research, assessment and treatment should be carried out based on this understanding.

Background. Several factors facilitate or hinder occupational therapy efficacy research.