American Journal of Occupational Therapy

Objective. The purpose of this study was to examine the discriminant validity of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) when used to evaluate a heterogeneous sample of subjects with psychiatric disorders.

Method. Sixty subjects, ranging in age from 16 to 72 years, participated in this study; 30 were persons without disorders living in the community; 30 had diagnosed psychiatric disorders. Two univariate F tests were used to test the hypothesis that mean AMPS measures would differ significantly between the group with and the group without psychiatric disorders.

Results. The hypothesis was supported for both AMPS motor and process scale measures. As would be expected among a sample that includes many higher functioning persons, many subjects with psychiatric disorders did just as well as subjects in the group without psychiatric disorders.

Conclusions. Motor as well as process skill abilities of persons with psychiatric disorders should be evaluated. Because the AMPS provides more specific features than other global functional instruments, it can help clinicians plan treatment and intervention more effectively. Further examination of the motor and process skill deficits within and among diagnostic subgroups and of the effect of medication and prolonged hospitalization on AMPS motor and process abilities is indicated.

Objectives. Occupational therapists sometimes observe an alarming discrepancy between the occupational performance skills developed in the clinical setting and the degree to which the client willingly puts these skills to use outside the clinical environment. The literature strongly suggests that perceived self-efficacy partially explains’ this discrepancy; however, an understanding of perceived self-efficacy has not yet been integrated into the practice of occupational therapy. Both a lack of awareness of the construct and a lack of ability to assess perceived self-efficacy within the occupational performance domain are responsible for this lack of integration into practice. This article presents the development, reliability, and validity testing of a measure of perceived self-efficacy developed particularly for use by occupational therapists, the Self-Efficacy Gauge.

Method. Reliability and validity testing was performed through use of a mailed survey( n = 126). Test–retest reliability, internal consistency, and alternate form reliability were examined. In addition, the subjects’ scores on the Gauge were compared to actual performance and a hopelessness scale.

Results. The Self-Efficacy Gauge has a reasonable degree of reliability when used on a clinical sample whose perceived self-efficacy for occupational performance activities is unlikely to change. The results also provide preliminary support for the validity of the instrument.

Conclusion. It is recognized that without a gold standard for comparison, validity testing will be an ongoing need.

Objectives. Occupational therapists who work primarily with children were surveyed regarding their skill levels in competencies that define pediatric practice.

Method. The subjects were 90 advanced practitioners who received specially certification in pediatric occupational therapy in 1992 and 52 inexperienced practitioners with 5 or fewer years’ experience. Respondents rated themselves from needs assistance to highly skilled on 94 competencies.

Results. A principle components analysis of the 142 surveys identified six primary constructs that described related areas of skill in the respondents: child evaluation, communication and consultation, working with families, understanding service provision systems, use of assistive technology, and neonatology and feeding. Child evaluation, with emphasis on developmental framework, analysis of sensory integration, and neuromotor function, was the strongest construct; respondents rated it the highest. Communication and consultation with team and family members also received high ratings. The advanced practitioner respondents rated themselves higher than the inexperienced practitioner respondents in 73 of the 80 competencies in the factors identified. The differences were greatest in the competencies of analysis of sensory processing and integration, analysis of neuromotor components, and consultation with other professionals.

Conclusion. Findings suggest that advanced practitioners develop expertise in sensory integration and neuromotor analysis, and that evaluation and consultation are important skill areas in advanced occupational therapy practice.

Objectives. The purposes of this study were (a) to describe how neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT) is currently being provided by occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech–language therapists (e.g., setting, duration, frequency, techniques used), (b) to determine which populations are viewed by clinicians as most responsive to NDT intervention, and (c) to examine clinicians’ attitudes and beliefs regarding NDT philosophy, role delineation, and provision of NDT service.

Method. A sample of 431 members of the NeuroDevelopmental Treatment Association, Inc. responded to a questionnaire examining current practice in NDT.

Results. Respondents typically provided NDT once or twice a week with an emphasis on qualitative movement and functional performance. Persons with mild to moderate levels of motor dysfunction were viewed as responding best to NDT. Therapists reported using an eclectic approach that combines NDT with other treatment approaches. The three disciplines reported using different types of NDT handling techniques to accomplish discipline-specific goals. There was a strong belief that NDT is a total management program that considers the client’s functioning in many settings and that families should be involved in the client’s therapy program.

Conclusion. There was wide consensus that the theoretical tenets underlying NDT need revision to consider current theoretical thinking and practice.

This article addresses implications for the practice of occupational therapy when that therapy is guided by theories of motor learning. In occupational therapy, clients must learn or relearn motor skills through the use of activities. The occupational therapist must present activities in a manner that elicits the retention and transfer of the desired skills for use in functional settings. Therefore, the therapist should strive for acquisition conditions that facilitate retention and transfer of the learned skills. The processes that underlie motor learning should guide therapy. Three major factors that affect motor learning are environmental conditions, cognitive processes, and movement organization. Examination of the clinical implications of these factors, however, results in contradictory predictions regarding optimal practice conditions for motor skills. This article explores the successful integration of these factors and its application in occupational therapy practice. It is suggested that increasing the difficulty of the learning context during practice is beneficial for retention.

Qualitative research methodology was used to explore supervisor perceptions of learning style characteristics required for student success in fieldwork. A focus discussion group was used to elicil success themes identified by clinicians. These themes were compared to learning style themes previously identified in quantitative studies. Techniques of conversation analysis were used to assess congruence of verbalized themes with participant interactions during the discussion group. Themes that emerged were the importance of teamwork, active experimentation, flexibility, adaptability, and doing. Discussion participants actively modeled teamwork.

Student preemployment agreements are an emerging form of employee-sponsored financial support for students. Forms of financial support for students include the preemployment agreement, sign-on bonus, employment bonus, scholarship, loan, stipend, and grant. Various professional, legal, and ethical issues are involved in the student–employer negotiation of the preemployment agreements. Students may consider financial support for education, type of practice setting, or location of future employment as primary benefits of preemployment agreements. Fieldwork facilities may identify therapist recruitment as the primary goal when offering a financial incentive to a student. Academic fieldwork coordinators may list preservation of the therapist–student relationship or adherence to the fieldwork agreement reached between the academic program and the fieldwork facility as a primary goal. In this article, guidelines for the practical use of preemployment agreements are outlined for use by students and professionals in academic and practice settings.