OTSurveyThe British journal of occupational therapy2025

Interprofessional collaboration: Measuring occupational therapists and teachers' perceptions of collaborative practice in inclusive Australian primary schools.

Jill Jeremy, Joanne Hinitt, Ilektra Spandagou

PMID 40336877

WHAT IT FOUND

Teachers and occupational therapists rated their collaboration as better than average, with no significant difference in their total scores.

However, teachers rated themselves higher on flexibility and shared goals. Systems factors like time were the strongest barrier to collaboration.

Key findings

01Teachers and occupational therapists both rated their collaborative practice as better than average, with no significant difference in their total collaboration scores.

02Teachers rated themselves as significantly more collaborative than occupational therapists on the components of flexibility and collective ownership of goals.

03Systems factors, such as time and resources, showed a stronger correlation with collaboration ratings than personal or professional factors, and occupational therapists rated systems factors as verging on barriers.

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study used non-probability sampling with a small and unequal number of participants (108 therapists vs 33 teachers), which limits generalisability. The data are self-reported perceptions of collaboration rather than observed or actual collaborative behaviour. The response rate is unknown, and the long 17-month collection period during the pandemic may have introduced bias. The TTCI measures the process of collaboration, not the outcomes for students, so it does not indicate whether collaboration improved student inclusion or achievement.

Declared interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest and no financial support for the research.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret the high self-rated collaboration scores as evidence that the collaboration is effective for students. The study measured perceptions of the process, not actual behaviour or student outcomes, and the sample was small and self-selected.

Read it on PubMed →