Vocational intervention based on the Model of Human Occupation: A review of evidence

Abstract

Work is a growing concern in disability and rehabilitation fields. Specific evidence related to occupational therapy in the area of vocational rehabilitation is somewhat limited. With increased demands for occupation-focused, evidence-based, and theory-informed practice, this review aims to use clinically relevant questions to organize and synthesize evidence regarding work-related interventions specifically related to an occupation-focused theory, the Model of Human Occupation. A total of 45 published works related to both the MOHO and vocational issues were identified and included in the review. The review demonstrates that there is a range of evidence that supports the use of the MOHO and its tools as a basis for work-based clinical interventions. Evidence supports the conclusion that MOHO-based work assessments have good psychometric properties and are useful in evaluating vocational potential and needs. MOHO-based work programs have been shown to have a positive impact in improving vocational outcomes to a range of clients.

A process for developing sustainable evidence-based occupational therapy practice

“…Thus, the findings in the present study increase the knowledge about actions that can be important in making sustainable improvements guided by an OT model of practice. In addition, and in line with other studies of the implementation of theories or models in OT, it was found that the implementation enhances occupational therapists' attempts to undertake evidencebased clinical interventions, and increase the occupation focus in practice as well the client-centredness (17)(18)(19)30). However, the findings add to existing knowledge by illustrating how implementations relating to evidence-based interventions, occupation focus, and client-centredness can become connected with sustainability.…”

“…Together, these difficulties provide important reasons for occupational therapists working in health-care settings to make the intervention process in their daily practice evidence-based. The implementation of evidence, including models of practice, has been found to be valuable, as it gives a strong foundation for OT practice (28,30). However, it is known that sustainable implementation of evidence in OT, as in other areas, is challenging and takes time (6,12,18).…”

Vocational Rehabilitation and Occupational Therapy: Impact of a Knowledge Translation Initiative

“…The findings of the present study correlate with those in the literature, in confirming that knowledge translation is a complex process for which there is no easy solution (Grol and Wensing, ; Grol et al, ; Lencucha et al, ; Metzler and Metz, ; Stergiou‐Kita, ). It is clear that for this group of OTs, as in the literature, there are many barriers to the process of knowledge translation (Michie et al, ) and to the integration of EBP (McCluskey and Cusick, ; Lee and Kielhofner, ; Murphy and Robinson, ). Therefore, it is integral that, prior to undertaking knowledge translation initiatives, the barriers and learning needs of the healthcare profession in question are assessed (Grimshaw et al, ; Hakkennes and Dodd, ).…”

“…All participants strongly agreed that OTs need to be proactive in terms of VR, revisit their fundamental skills and reassert themselves as key leaders in the field of VR (Alsop, 2004;Bade and Eckert, 2008;College of Occupational Therapists, 2008;Lee and Kielhofner, 2009;World Federation of Occupational Therapists, 2012). A lack of system supports (relating to management, professional organization, legislative backing) was cited as a primary barrier to the integration of EBP and VR in daily clinical practice.…”

Development of a Japanese Version of a Collaborative Relationship Scale between Clients and Occupational Therapists

“…Studies have also shown that the identification of self-recognised occupational performance problems appears to enhance client motivation and to increase the relevance of personalised goals in rehabilitation. 17 , 18 ) However, there is no single tool to assess the degree of shared power between the client and the occupational therapist in the client-centric decision-making process. Therefore, it is, by default, simply evaluated subjectively by occupational therapists at the clinical site.…”