Article review: “Therapeutic Use of Humor in Occupational Therapy” by Vergreer & MacRae (1993)

Article review: “Therapeutic Use of Humor in Occupational Therapy” by Vergreer & MacRae (1993)

This qualitative study used a phenomenological approach, where they examined the experiences of five OTs from a variety of settings and personal attributes (age etc). These were randomly selected from a pool of eleven. The subjects were interviewed, and then the transcripts were analysed and coded whereby ‘meaning units’ attributed to each shift to topic. These units were grouped into themes.

They identified 16 themes of ways in which the OTs used humour in their work.

 

This study showed that OTs use humour therapeutically in a number of different ways. Further investigation could be exploring how humour changes over time with OTs- eg does it increase as a result of confidence and self-learning about how to use? Or is there a difference in the use of spontaneous vs planned humour.

Advertisements
Article review: “Working alliance development in occupational therapy: A cross-case analysis” by Morrison & Smith (2013)

Article review: “Working alliance development in occupational therapy: A cross-case analysis” by Morrison & Smith (2013)

In this study Morrison & Smith wanted to investigate the experiences of OTs and the therapeutic relationship with clients.

gross-raisin-otter

History of the Therapeutic Use of Self

History of the Therapeutic Use of Self

How has the therapeutic use of self been used over time throughout Occupational Therapy’s history?

dr-who-otters
Source: http://www.kwaddell.blogspot.co.uk
E-learning resources for CPD

E-learning resources for CPD

Cancer in the Community e-learning course

The Royal Marsden School has launched a free Cancer in the Community e-learning course.

The course is composed of four standalone modules (40 to 50 minutes duration each):

  • Cancer Prevention and Screening
  • Cancer Diagnosis and Staging
  • Cancer Treatments
  • Living With and Beyond Cancer

The materials have been written by clinical specialists and experts at The Royal Marsden School and will enable healthcare professionals of all grades, working in a range of community settings, to broaden their knowledge of key aspects of cancer care.  This work was commissioned by Health Education England (HEE) and is available nationally. Key features include:

Videos and animation to enhance the learning and emphasise key areas

Quizzes to embed learning and track progress

‘Deeper dive’ resources and workbook to enable learners to explore topics in more depth, and to record their own personal learning and reflection

Certificate upon completion

This e-learning course will be relevant to all qualified and non-qualified community-based health and social care workers, including community matrons, nursing staff, allied health professionals (including physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and dieticians) and support workers who meet patients with cancer.

The modules are available on the e-learning for healthcare website (either on an open access basis or for registered users) or you can download the source files from the NHS eLearning Repository to use in your own Learning Management System or Virtual Learning Environment. Alternatively, if you are unable to download from these sources or would like further information, please contact the School:

 

The stroke resource- STARs website.

occupational therapy.com resources (esp for USA conversion)

 

quality /service improvement online course

This new e-learning course may be of interest for those of you thinking about Quality or Service Improvement activities

http://www.hqip.org.uk/resources/introduction-to-quality-improvement-for-patients-and-public/

The HQIP site itself is well worth a browse to update yourself on what is happening in Quality/Service Improvement.

http://www.hqip.org.uk/about-us/

 

values based training- complete all five ethical scenarios and will get CPD certificate

www.otresearch.vxcommunity.com/register

Article review: “Evidence-based medicine: a movement in crisis?” by Greenhalgh et al (2014)

Article review: “Evidence-based medicine: a movement in crisis?” by Greenhalgh et al (2014)

If you need reminding what Evidence Based Practice (EBP) is, check here.

Not sure what Trish was up to but this article is printed in really small font and I had to zoom to 170% in order to be able to read it.

detective-otter

Zoom activated, I could now tell the article discusses some limitations of EBP, and the authors argue that although EBP has many benefits it has created some unintended negatives as well, which they describe as:

Drug companies controlling the research agenda, meaning evidence base is biassed according to their vested interests. Examples include fiddling inclusion criteria to make it likely people who will create desired results will participate, and only publishing positive results.

Volume of evidence has become unmanageable. We’ve all done a CINAHL search and returned 1,062 results. You don’t see how you can narrow your search terms anymore and you certainly can’t read all the abstracts…

Benefits identified as statistically significant may actually provide negligible  difference to patients in real life situations. Especially when research is carried out poorly, eg small sample size or drug company fiddling as mentioned above, the efficacy of treatment is falsely inflated for what it would actually be on a real population.

Inflexible rules risk healthcare becoming management-driven (following technical instruction) rather than client-centred (using clinical expertise). Eg creating protocols or checklists from EBP and then only following these in patient care. Like the QOF, where GPs get money for achieving health targets- Greenhalgh suggests that patients are monitored and provided check-box medication if they meet the QOF criteria, without consultation about their individual circumstances (client-centred care). This is a point Cohen & Hersh (2004)  agree with. O’Halloran et al (2010) follow on by saying that the technical guidelines produced by EBP stifle creativity.

Evidence available for individual conditions and not for co-morbidity, making it difficult to find evidence for patients with multiple diagnoses.  An aging population plus better management of chronic disease means more people have multiple conditions, which research studies don’t cover, removing individualised patient care.

 

Greenhalgh et al (2014) suggest overcoming these negatives by providing individualised care taking the context and even professional creativity into account. Patient advocacy groups should dictate areas of research more than companies. Peer-reviewed publishers should up their standards for article inclusion, and information should be disseminated in more user-friendly ways/methods (like infographics/via YouTube).

 

Note: apparently comorbidity is more than one illness in a person, and multimorbidity is more than two illnesses in the same person.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Source:

Cohen AM and Hersh WR (2004) Criticisms of Evidence–Based Medicine. Evidence-based Cardiovascular Medicine 8(3): 197–198.
Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N and for the Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group (2014) Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 348(jun13 4): g3725–g3725. Available at: http://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/348/bmj.g3725.full.pdf [Accessed on 03.05.2017]
O’Halloran P, Porter S and Blackwood B (2010) Evidence based practice and its critics: what is a nurse manager to do? Journal of Nursing Management 18(1): 90–95.