Occupational Therapy in Return-to-Work Processes After Stroke: A Scoping Review of Ongoing Therapeutic Support and Implications for Work-Treatment Balance.

No formal quality appraisal was performed; the 58 included studies range from qualitative case descriptions to one quantitative experimental study, so the findings are a descriptive map, not a test of what works. Most included studies were qualitative (34 of 58), so the evidence base is largely descriptive of experiences and processes rather than effectiveness. OT roles were only counted when explicitly attributed to OTs in the original study; contributions embedded in multidisciplinary teams without a named OT role were coded as 'none', so the true scope of OT involvement is likely underrepresented. Classification of therapeutic integration levels relied entirely on what each study explicitly described; if a study did not clearly state whether treatment continued during work, it was coded as 'not described', which may understate actual integration. Service systems, terminology, and policy frameworks differ across countries (the sample includes Japanese and international studies), so the patterns identified may not transfer directly to every setting. The review is limited to Japanese and English publications, which may exclude relevant work in other languages.

Funded by a grant from Tokyo Metropolitan University's competitive research funds (2023 fiscal year). The authors declare no conflicts of interest. No industry sponsor is named.

Do not read this as evidence that a particular RTW programme or OT intervention is effective for stroke survivors. It is a descriptive map of how support is organised across 58 heterogeneous studies, not a comparison of treatments. The authors state plainly that the findings should be interpreted as structural patterns, not effectiveness evaluations, and that further quantitative and intervention-focused research is needed.