Integrating Occupational Therapy Specific Assessments in Practice: Exploring Practitioner Experiences.
Eric Asaba, Mio Nakamura, Akie Asaba and 1 others
PMID 29333112WHAT IT FOUND
Therapists in Sweden and Japan said occupation-based assessments made intervention planning clearer, but time, space, and team culture often pushed them to quicker, less occupation-focused tools.
Key findings
01Therapists said occupation-specific assessments such as AMPS, A3, and COPM often took more time and effort than routine ADL or goal checklists, but made intervention planning clearer.
02Time and physical space were common barriers; some therapists said they had to do evaluations after hours, while others said making spaces look like home helped.
03Team culture could support or block use of client-centered and occupation-based assessments; some therapists felt pressure from colleagues who preferred a biomechanical approach.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only therapists who had taken AMPS and A3 courses were recruited, so the findings may not represent therapists without that training. Participants volunteered after information was sent to a course database, and the paper does not know why other course participants did not respond. Interview questions directly asked about challenges and helpfulness, which may have led participants to describe both. Individual and focus group interviews were combined, and the two country contexts were not interviewed in the same period. The study reports therapists' experiences, not client outcomes or evidence that assessments improve care.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that occupation-based assessments work or fail for clients. It reports therapists' experiences with using them, and all participants had already chosen AMPS and A3 training.