Occupational Therapy Group Interventions Within the Area of Time Use and Occupational Balance: A Scoping Review.
Maria Lönn, Katrin Häggström Westberg, Ann-Caroline Holst and 1 others
PMID 42357926WHAT IT FOUND
Thirteen occupational therapy group interventions for time use and occupational balance were mapped across 31 studies, but most came from Scandinavia, few had manuals, and most studies never named a primary outcome.
No single intervention is ready to adopt as standard.
Key findings
01The review identified 13 distinct group interventions across 31 articles, with the most studied being BEL (10 studies), followed by LGO and ReDO (4 each). Most interventions were developed in Scandinavian countries, particularly Sweden.
02Only 6 of the 13 interventions were described as manual-driven, and numerous publications lacked detailed information about session content or delivery methods, limiting the ability to replicate or systematically evaluate them.
03Most included studies did not specify or describe a primary outcome, and there was significant variation in the choice of outcome measures across interventions, which the authors identify as a fundamental limitation in occupational therapy research design.
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
Most interventions were developed in Scandinavian countries, raising questions about whether they will work the same way in other cultural and healthcare contexts. Only 6 of 13 interventions had a manual, and several publications did not describe session content or delivery in enough detail to replicate the intervention. Most included studies did not specify a primary outcome, making it impossible to compare which intervention is most effective for which goal. The search was limited to English-language, peer-reviewed publications from the last 10 years, which may exclude relevant work in other languages or older foundational studies. The populations and settings were highly heterogeneous (mental illness, chronic pain, MS, substance use, insomnia, university students), so the interventions are not directly comparable. The Wilson and Cleary model used to categorise outcome measures does not explicitly incorporate occupational therapy-specific constructs, which may miss important dimensions.
Declared interests
Funded by Sparbanksstiftelsen Region Halland (Grant Number 1011340) as part of a larger project on occupational therapy group interventions in psychiatric care. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that any particular group intervention works for time use or occupational balance. This is a scoping review that maps what exists; it does not test whether any intervention is effective. Most of the underlying studies are small, single-site, lack a clearly defined primary outcome, and come from a narrow geographic region, so you cannot conclude from this review that a specific program will improve a patient's daily balance.