Abstract
In light of the Centennial Vision charge of supporting practice through evidence, this article reviews productive aging research published in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) in 2013 and as a whole from 2009 to 2013. Thirteen such articles were published in 2013, consisting of 4 systematic reviews that identified effective occupational therapy interventions for older adults with low vision; 1 randomized controlled trial that examined changes in occupational therapists’ mental health practices with DVD training; and 8 descriptive articles addressing instrument development, practitioner decision making, patient management of medications, and effects of task activities on pain and participation levels. From 2009 to 2013, the quantity and quality of AJOT articles on productive aging increased; 63 articles were published, including 24 effectiveness studies, 14 basic research studies, 15 articles on instrument development and testing, 1 article linking occupational engagement and health, 6 articles on professional education, and 3 articles addressing professional questions.
The Centennial Vision target date of 2017 is a mere 3 years away. This vision created a road map to the future of occupational therapy to commemorate the American Occupational Therapy Association’s (AOTA’s) upcoming 100th anniversary. The vision statement projects a healing profession that “is a powerful, widely recognized, science-driven, and evidence-based profession with a globally connected and diverse workforce meeting society’s occupational needs” (AOTA, 2007, p. 613). AOTA’s mission as stated in the Centennial Vision is to promote research that supports the effectiveness of occupational therapy services, and according to Gutman (2008), the following types of research do so:
Effectiveness studies supporting practice
Development and testing to establish reliability and validity of occupational therapy assessments
Correlational and descriptive studies that demonstrate linkages between occupational engagement and health
Basic research studies that provide information about disabilities and their impact on functional participation
Studies that answer important questions about topics related to the direction of the profession’s growth.
Also contained in the Centennial Vision is a call to sustain existing practice areas to meet society’s needs. Productive aging is one of the practice areas singled out for examination (AOTA, 2007; Baum, 2006). As the occupational therapy profession strives to fulfill the vision and follow the road map, it is necessary to continue to measure progress along the way. To that end, the editorial board of the American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) annually endeavors to assess its success in accomplishing the goal of increased quantity and quality of research studies it publishes. This year, the board is taking the opportunity to look at the past 5 years in aggregate as well. In this article, I review AJOT articles related to productive aging published in 2013 and provide an overview of this research from 2009 to 2013.
Method
The editor-in-chief of AJOT at the time (Sharon A. Gutman) screened all research articles published or accepted for publication in AJOT in the 2013 volume. She identified 13 articles describing research related to productive aging practice, which represented nearly 20% of all research studies published in AJOT in 2013. I read and reviewed these articles and the 63 articles on productive aging research published from 2009 to 2013 in light of my broad experience in productive aging, occupational therapy, and evidence-based practice. I identified the research level of each article using the AOTA Evidence-Based Literature Review Project Levels of Evidence Rating System (Table 1; Lieberman & Scheer, 2002) and assigned one of the following categories: effectiveness study, basic research, instrument development and testing, link between occupational engagement and health, professional education, or professional question. Table 2 summarizes the 13 articles published in 2013, and Table 3 indicates the category of all 63 articles published from 2009 to 2013.
American Occupational Therapy Association Evidence-Based Literature Review Project Levels of Evidence Rating System
Source. From “From the Desk of the Editor—State of the Journal,” by S. A. Gutman, 2008, American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, p. 620. Copyright © 2008 by the American Occupational Therapy Association. Reprinted with permission.
Summary of Evidence From Studies Published in 2013
Note. ADLs = activities of daily living; CCTV = closed-circuit television; FAQ = Functional Assessment Questionnaire; FVPT = Functional Vision Performance Test; IADLs = instrumental activities of daily living; IVI = Impact of Vision Impairment; MLVAI = Melbourne Low-Vision ADL Index; MMSE = Mini-Mental State Examination; MNRead = Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test; NEI VFQ–17 = National Eye Institute Visual Function Quality of Life Questionnaire–17; NEI VFQ–25 = 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire; OT = occupational therapy; UFOV = Useful Field of View; VA LV VFQ–48 = Veteran Affairs Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire–48.
This table is a product of AOTA’s Evidence-Based Practice Project and the American Journal of Occupational Therapy. Copyright © 2014 by the American Occupational Therapy Association. It may be freely reproduced for personal use in clinical or educational settings as long as the source is cited. All other users require written permission from the American Occupational Therapy Association. To apply, visit www.copyright.com.
Suggested citation: D’Amico, M. (2014). Update on productive aging research in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2013, and overview of research published 2009–2013 (Table 2). American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 69, e247–e260. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2014.013581
Research Studies in Productive Aging Published in the American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2009–2013, by Category
Note. N = 63. MA = meta-analysis; RCT = randomized controlled trial; SR = systematic review.
Effectiveness Studies
In 2013, 5 effectiveness studies were published in AJOT: 4 systematic reviews and 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT). The 4 systematic reviews focused on different aspects of low vision intervention. Berger, McAteer, Schreier, and Kaldenberg (2013) evaluated what interventions were most effective for maintaining, restoring, and improving leisure and social participation for older adults with low vision. Their findings identified strong evidence for helping clients develop problem-solving skills and for providing a combination of services, including problem-solving training, skills training, and home and environmental adaptations, to sustain and improve leisure and social participation. Justiss (2013) assessed driving adaptations and interventions, finding insufficient evidence to support current interventions. However, studies by Liu, Brost, Horton, Kenyon, and Mears (2013) and Smallfield, Clem, and Myers (2013) found strong evidence supporting occupational therapy services, adaptive techniques and devices, skills training in addressing instrumental and personal activities of daily living (ADLs), and use of optic and nonoptic devices for reading and participation in ADLs for older adults with low vision. Lysack, Leach, Russo, Paulson, and Lichtenberg (2013) conducted a two-group RCT to investigate the effectiveness of DVD training for occupational therapy clinicians to address mental health issues in older adults and found that such training was beneficial to the clinicians and the quality of care for their patients.
From 2009 to 2013, AJOT published 24 effectiveness studies: 19 at Level I, 2 at Level II, 2 at Level III, and 1 at Level V. Fourteen of the Level I studies were systematic reviews conducted in collaboration with AOTA’s Evidence-Based Practice Project. The other Level I studies were 4 RCTs and 1 meta-analysis. Ten effectiveness studies related to productive aging were published in 2012. These included 4 systematic reviews (Arbesman & Mosley; Chase, Mann, Wasek, & Arbesman; Orellano, Colón, & Arbesman; Stav, Arbesman, Hallenen, & Lane), 1 RCT (Chippendale & Bear-Lehman), 1 meta-analysis (Schepens, Sen, Painter, & Murphy), 2 two-group non-RCTs (Hersch et al.; O’Brien, Bynon, Morarty, & Presnell), and 2 pretest–posttest single-group studies (Elliott et al.; Haltiwanger). These studies primarily focused on the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions, occupation- and activity-based interventions, health management, and fall prevention programs for community-dwelling older adults.
In 2011, AJOT published 1 RCT (Schepens, Panzer, & Goldberg) that addressed the effectiveness of a specific fall prevention program and 6 systematic reviews related to the effectiveness of interventions used with people with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (Jensen & Padilla; Letts, Edwards, et al.; Letts, Minezes, et al.; Padilla, 2011a, 2011b; Thinnes & Padilla). From 2009 to 2010 there were 2 effectiveness studies: 1 RCT and 1 case study. The RCT investigated tailored activity and the effect on pain and activity for adults with osteoarthritis (Murphy, Lyden, Smith, Dong, & Koliba, 2010). The case study investigated the effectiveness of powered mobility for a nursing home resident with dementia (Wang, Holliday, & Fernie, 2009).
Basic Research
In 2013, 4 basic research studies were published in AJOT. Dickerson (2013) explored the types of assessments used by clinicians and driver rehabilitation specialists (DRSs) to determine which assessments provided the best determinants of on-road driving ability of clients. Dickerson also explored the types and effectiveness of assessments used by DRSs in decisions regarding driving recommendations for clients. She found that DRSs used a variety of vision, perceptual, and cognitive tests to determine driving potential; however, on-road performance was the primary assessment used to determine fitness to drive. Kratz, Schepens, and Murphy (2013) examined the effects of cognitive and physical task demands on older adults with osteoarthritis and found that performing these tasks lowered pain and increased fatigue but that no change occurred from baseline in participant activity levels. In a qualitative study, Mortenson, Clarke, and Best (2013) explored the factors required for making decisions about prescribing powered mobility for older adults. In another qualitative study, Sanders and Van Oss (2013) analyzed medication adherence strategies embedded into daily routines used by older adults taking four or more medications. Both studies identified the contextual factors of environment and routines as impacts on decision making (Mortenson et al., 2013) and performance (Sanders & Van Oss, 2013).
From 2009 to 2012, 13 basic research articles were published in AJOT. Dickerson, Reistetter, Davis, and Monahan (2011) identified the beneficial use of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (Fisher, 2003) to predetermine on-road performance. Peralta-Catipon and Hwang (2011) assessed healthy lifestyles of older adults and the number of self-reported chronic diseases and impairments. Schmid et al. (2011) described fear of falling in people with stroke at baseline and 6 mo after services. Perlmutter, Bhorade, Gordon, Hollingsworth, and Baum (2010) explored factors that affect participation in older adults and found that mild levels of decreased hearing and vision, depression, and decreased cognition accounted for decreased participation in social and daily activities. Finlayson, Shevil, & Cho (2009) explored cognitive changes related to aging of individuals with multiple sclerosis and recommended education of patients and caregivers about symptoms related to declining cognitive function. Donovan and Corcoran (2010) discussed the importance of uplifts, or positive aspects of giving care, for caregivers of people with dementia and ways in which occupational therapy practitioners can address this subject during intervention. Elgin et al. (2010) and Hunt, Brown, and Gilman (2010) explored the challenges faced by drivers with hemianopia and quadrantanopia and dementia, respectively, determining that occupational therapists need to be alert to these challenges. Classen, Shechtman, Awadzi, Joo, & Lanford (2010) explored driving errors related to crashes by age and gender. They recommended program development of safety and prevention strategies, especially for women. Stav, Snider Weidley, and Love (2011) looked at barriers to driver training programs across clinical and community contexts. Shaw, Polgar, Vrkljan, and Jacobson (2010) looked at older adults’ perceptions of vehicular safety and advocated for education programs to train older adults in vehicle safety and fit. Mullen, Weaver, Riendeau, Morrison, and Bédard (2010) examined the relationship between driving performance and simulator sickness.
Instrument Development and Testing
In 2013, 4 articles on instrument development and testing were published in AJOT. Two were related to driving and driving assessment outcomes (Classen, Wang, Crizzle, Winter, & Lanford, 2013; Classen, Wang, Winter, et al., 2013); both studies addressed the effectiveness of assessments to determine the best tool for ascertaining whether a person is suited to an on-road driving evaluation. Their findings indicated that family or caregiver report on the Safe Driving Behavior Measure was a better indicator of driving behavior than client reports and that the Useful Field of View risk index (Ball & Owsley, 1993) was the best predictor of on-road driving outcomes. Hwang (2013) examined the validity of the Health Enhancement Lifestyle Profile (HELP)–Screener (Hwang 2012), which is used to assess health-risk behavior of older adults. Perlmutter et al. (2013) found that an in-home lighting assessment was useful in helping older adults with low vision participate in near-point reading tasks.
From 2009 to 2012, 11 articles on instrument development and testing were published in AJOT. Five focused on instruments that measure driving performance or predict on-road driving performance (Classen et al., 2012a, 2012b; Classen, Schectman, Awadzi, Joo, & Lanford, 2010; Dalchow, Niewoehner, Henderson, & Carr, 2010; George & Crotty, 2010; Kay, Bundy, & Clemson, 2009; Shechtman, Awadzi, Classen, Lanford, & Joo, 2010; Unsworth, Pallant, Russell, Germano, & Odell, 2010). Katz, Averbuch, and Bar-Haim Erez (2012) focused on the Dynamic Lowenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment–Geriatric Version (Katz, Averbuch, & Bar-Haim Erez, 2011). Other instruments studied included the HELP (Hwang, 2010) and the HELP–Screener (Hwang, 2012). Findings from all of these studies indicated that these assessment tools are useful measures in work with community-dwelling older adults.
Link Between Occupational Engagement and Health
Only one study, published in 2009, addressed the link between occupational engagement and health. Wood, Womack, and Hooper (2009) discussed how lack of routines affected quality of life, affect, and time use of clients with dementia on Alzheimer’s special care units and called for occupational therapists to become involved in educating health care systems to improve quality of life by using daily living routines.
Professional Education
Three studies published from 2009 to 2012 addressed educational challenges in occupational therapy. Deacy, Yuen, Barstow, Warren, and Vogtle (2012) surveyed occupational therapy education programs and recommended they focus on better preparing occupational therapy practitioners to address the low vision rehabilitation needs of clients. Yuen and Burik (2011) explored occupational therapy programs and their content for education on driver rehabilitation and found inconsistent amounts of content across curricula. Vrkljan and colleagues (2010) developed a tool kit for both practitioners and consumers to use in improving driving safety.
Professional Question
Three studies, 2 published in 2010 and 1 in 2012, directly addressed directions for occupational therapy practitioners’ professional growth and education concerning older adults. Di Stefano and Macdonald (2010) and Korner-Bitensky, Menon, von Zweck, and Van Benthem (2010) called on occupational therapy practitioners to build their capacity to address the needs of older drivers. Leland, Elliott, O’Malley, and Murphy (2012) discussed evidence and future directions for the role of occupational therapy in fall prevention.
Discussion
From 2009 to 2013, 63 studies that addressed the area of productive aging were published. Thirteen articles were published in 2013, compared with 6 in 2009. The 2012 volume of AJOT had the most studies published, at 17. AOTA was the primary force behind the increased quantity and quality of Level I studies by sponsoring systematic reviews, but RCT studies published in AJOT also increased. Although descriptive studies are not as powerful in strength of evidence as Level I effectiveness studies, they are starting points for refining questions and developing methodological rigor for higher level studies addressing effectiveness of occupational therapy practice. In 2013, the number of studies published on productive aging decreased slightly, but the quantity of studies that inform practice increased. During the 5-year period, instrument development and testing of occupational therapy–based assessments increased, promoting their broad application both across professions and in occupational therapy practice.
Implications for Occupational Therapy Practice
The research published from 2009 to 2013 provides support for the following occupational therapy practices in work with the older adult population:
Use of specific assessments with older drivers
Use of specific assessments and rehabilitation techniques with older adults who have vision loss or low vision impairments
Use of routines to promote quality of life and healthy lifestyles for both community-dwelling older adults and adults with dementia or health challenges living in residential facilities
Attention to the psychosocial needs of older adults as part of routine practice.
Implications for Education
The review of AJOT articles from 2009 to 2013 indicates that occupational therapy education programs need to continually update their content to reflect new evidence supporting occupational therapy practice, including new assessments and interventions that address low vision, driving, quality of life, and participation of the growing population of older adults. These programs must include coursework that
Teaches students to be effective consumers and analyzers of journal articles,
Describes best practices for working with clients with dementia,
Addresses driving assessment and intervention,
Addresses low vision assessment and intervention,
Describes ways to create healthy environments using routines for both community-dwelling older adults and those in residential facilities, and
Provides instruction in the evaluation and intervention of the psychosocial needs of older adults.
Implications for Research
Research continues to be an area of need in occupational therapy. Although occupational therapy–driven research has increased, much of the literature supporting the effectiveness of intervention modalities continues to come from outside the field. Occupational therapy researchers need to continue their work and train students and practitioners in the research process at all levels of development. Potential directions for research include
Replication studies of occupational therapy interventions used with older adults;
Studies establishing the validity and reliability of occupational therapy assessment tools and other tools used in occupational therapy practice with older adults;
Basic research and qualitative studies that address occupation, occupational performance, and health of client populations to develop higher level effectiveness studies;
Continued development of new occupational therapy assessment tools that effectively assess occupational performance outcomes; and
Research directed at how occupational therapy practitioners’ decision making related to intervention informs education and practice.
Conclusion
Although the quality and quantity of articles on productive aging in AJOT increased from 2009 to 2013, the need remains for continued growth. As a profession, we must continue this productivity and momentum on evidence-based practice and research on productive aging. We must also include this evidence in professional education to sustain our power to move forward, especially as we approach the centennial celebration. Not only is the profession maturing in its capacity to improve research, education, and practice, but the people in the field are maturing as well, improving our competitive edge (Clark, 2011). Let’s continue the march forward to becoming “a powerful, widely recognized, science-driven, and evidence-based profession with a globally connected and diverse workforce meeting society’s occupational needs” (AOTA, 2007, p. 613) by providing society with increased opportunities for productive aging.
