The Core Concepts of Occupational Therapy

A Dynamic Framework for Practice

Jennifer Creek

• Verlag: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
• Jahr: 2010
• ISBN:
  9780857003621
• Thema: Medicina
• Thema: Terapia occupazionale

The profession of occupational therapy has a highly specialised language, but until now there have been no standard definitions of its key terms.

Based on the work of the terminology project group of the European Network of Occupational Therapy in Higher Education (ENOTHE), this book selects and defines the core building blocks of occupational therapy theory. Consensus definitions of a wide range of terms are developed through an analysis of published definitions from around the world. Concepts with similar meanings are clustered into groups, and the clusters are then arranged into a conceptual map. The book provides an analysis of what each term means in common usage, how it is used in occupational therapy, and its implications for therapeutic practice. The conceptual framework that emerges represents an important contribution to the profession's understanding of the fundamental concepts of occupational therapy.

The consensus definitions presented in this book will facilitate communication between professionals as well as with clients and others, and will be of interest to occupational therapy practitioners, students, educators and researchers.

Section 1

Introduction

Chapter 1: The ENOTHE Terminology Project

Chapter 2: The Language of Occupational Therapy

Chapter 3: The Conceptual Framework

This book defines key occupational therapy terms and discusses how they work together. It also considers how the professional meaning of words relates to their common usage. Most words have more than one meaning. There is usually a common meaning, which is understood by the majority of people within a linguistic, cultural and social group, and there may also be a specialized meaning that is used within a discipline or professional group. Occupational therapists do not use terms that are unique to the profession; we take ordinary words and give them specialized meanings. This means that occupational therapists have to think carefully about how our clients understand the language we use and select the words that will best communicate our meanings.

The book is in three parts. The three chapters in Section 1 give the background to the ENOTHE terminology project and introduce the European conceptual framework for occupational therapy. In Section 2, Chapters 4 to 11 describe in detail the eight clusters of concepts that make up the conceptual framework. This description is from the perspective of the person performing the activity. The three chapters in Section 3 offer the perspective of the occupational therapist on understanding, measuring and facilitating the actions of her clients.

The three chapters in this first section introduce the European conceptual framework for occupational therapy. Chapter 1 describes the European Network of Occupational Therapy in Higher Education (ENOTHE) terminology project, which produced the conceptual framework. Chapter 2 discusses occupational therapy epistemology and terminology, offering an explanation of the difficulties that occupational therapists have with their professional vocabulary. Chapter 3 outlines the conceptual framework and explains its special characteristics.

It is not necessary to read the book in the order in which it has been written. A practitioner may, for example, prefer to start with Chapter 14, which describes how the conceptual framework can be used as a guide for practice, and then refer back to the chapters in Section 2 for more detailed discussion of specific terms. A student may begin at Chapter 3, which outlines the conceptual framework. An occupational therapy teacher may use individual chapters as the basis for tuition and discussion on particular concepts.

Chapter 1

The ENOTHE Terminology Project

Introduction

This book is the outcome of a unique collaboration between occupational therapists from six European countries speaking six different languages. It presents a conceptual framework that has been constructed from the key terms used by occupational therapists to describe and explain their work. This framework describes the relationships between a set of clearly defined terms and represents a consensus on the meaning of, and relationships between, the concepts and theories underpinning occupational therapy practice throughout Europe. The framework is intended to provide a coherent foundation for the development of occupational therapy theory.

The concepts and their definitions have been translated into all the languages of the terminology working group, so that the conceptual framework is both relevant and accessible to occupational therapists working across Europe.

How the chapter is organized

This chapter gives the background to the European Network of Occupational Therapy in Higher Education (ENOTHE) terminology project and describes the method used to develop a European terminology for occupational therapy. It finishes with a brief explanation of how the terms have been organized into two sections. Twenty-five terms refer to the performer’s experience of occupation, and these have been organized into the European conceptual framework for occupational therapy. The remaining five terms refer to the observer perspective of the therapist; these terms explain how occupational therapists use their understanding of occupation to design and implement therapeutic interventions with their clients.

The terminology working group

The European Network of Occupational Therapy in Higher Education was founded in 1995 on the initiative of the Council of Occupational Therapists for European Countries (COTEC). It is a thematic network funded by the European Socrates/Erasmus programme for the purpose of building cooperation between higher educational institutions, other academic organizations and professional bodies. ENOTHE supports a variety of projects, all contributing to the development of a European dimension to occupational therapy education.

In 2000, ENOTHE identified that two of the biggest barriers to the harmonization of professional education across Europe were the lack of uniformity in occupational therapy terminology and the language differences between member countries and member institutions. In order for students and staff moving between universities to be able to communicate effectively, they need to know that the words they use represent the same concepts in different countries. Therefore, a common terminology is a necessary aspect of harmonizing occupational therapy education across Europe. One of the objectives set for the years 2001–2004 was to create a uniform terminology and make it accessible to non-English-speaking occupational therapists and lecturers by producing a glossary of occupational therapy terms in four languages. In order for this objective to be achieved, delegates at the ENOTHE annual conference in 2001 were invited to volunteer to form a working group for the purpose of initiating and carrying out the terminology project.

The first group of volunteers consisted of five people, representing five languages: English, French, German, Greek and Portuguese. Since 2001, the membership of the group has changed several times (Box 1.1). At the time when the current piece of work was carried out, the group consisted of six members, from Austria, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. These occupational therapists represent six languages: Dutch, English, French, German, Portuguese and Spanish, with English adopted as the working language of the group. The advantages of using English were that most of the occupational therapy literature, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, was written in English and that all members of the group spoke English fluently.

Box 1.1: Membership of the ENOTHE terminology project group 2001–2008

Miguel Brea Rivero (2002–2008) Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Jennifer Creek (2003–2008) Freelance practitioner, United Kingdom.

Joaquim Faias (2001–2008) Escola Superior de Tecnologia da Saúde do Porto, Portugal.

Andreas Fisher (2001–2002) Fachhochschule Osnabruck, Institut für Gesundheitsberufe, Germany.

Maria Hoppe (2001–2002) Individual contributor to ENOTHE, Krumpendorf, Austria.

Sarah Kantartzis (2001–2006) Technological Educational Institution of Athens, Greece. (Link person to the ENOTHE Board between 2003 and 2006.)

Sylvie Meyer (2002–2008) HES-SO Haute école de travail social et de la santé, Switzerland.

Martine Paban (2001–2002) Institut de Formation en Ergothérapie, Montpellier, France.

Hilde Pitteljon (2005–2008) Katholieke Hogeschool Brugge-Oostende, Belgium.

Linda Renton Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. (Link person to the ENOTHE Board between 2001 and 2003.)

Ann de Ryck (2002–2004) Artevelde Hogeschool, Gent, Belgium.

Johanna Stadler-Grillmaier (2002–2008) Akademie für Ergotherapie, Vienna, Austria.

Liliya Todorova (Link person to the ENOTHE Board between 2006 and 2008.)

How the terminology was developed

From 2002 to 2008, the ENOTHE terminology group met two to three times a year to work on the project. In between face-to-face meetings, group members continued to work in their own countries and maintain regular email contact.

The group developed a method for producing definitions of key occupational therapy terms and a protocol for translating each definition into the languages of all the group members. There were four stages to this process:

1. selecting terms to define

2. collecting existing definitions of terms

3. constructing consensus definitions

4. translating the new definitions into the languages of the group.

Stage 1: Selecting terms

Early in the lifetime of the group, members agreed to define only core occupational therapy terms and not more general terms such as model, frame of reference and reasoning. The group began by choosing five terms that they felt represented core concepts in occupational therapy: activity, function, occupation, occupational performance and occupational therapy. The relationship between terms and concepts is discussed in more depth in Chapter 3. Once work on the definitions had started, members of the group took the decision that it was not necessary to define occupational therapy because each country already had its own definition. The World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) lists the definitions of occupational therapy used by member countries on its website (www.wfot.org./office_files/DEFINITIONS%20-%20DRAFT8%202007(2).pdf).

The terminology group therefore began its work by producing consensus definitions of four terms: activity, function, occupation and occupational performance. Once these definitions had been agreed, seven new terms w...