The effect of pre-clinical fieldwork subject on the confidence and professional skills of undergraduate occupational therapy students

Objectives: This study investigated the effect of a pre-clinical fieldwork subject on the confidence and professional skills of undergraduate occupational therapy students during their first full-time clinical fieldwork placement. Methods: Participants were 31 third year students enrolled in the pre-clinical fieldwork subject (experimental group), and 25 students not enrolled in the subject (control group). Both quantitative and qualitative methodologies were employed to address the research question. Student anxiety levels were measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and compared at three different intervals - prior to commencing the university semester, prior to commencing full-time practical placement, and following this full-time placement. Individual interviews were conducted with six students (three from the experimental group, three from the control group) to explore their perceptions regarding confidence levels and skill proficiencies during full-time placement. At each data analysis interval, responses for both groups were compared using independent samples t-tests. Responses were compared over time using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The qualitative data were subjected to thematic and content analysis. Results and Conclusions: In general, student anxiety levels did not differ between the experimental and control groups over time. However, qualitative results suggest that students who were enrolled in the pre-clinical subject have greater confidence and competence with occupational therapy skills, and have heightened awareness of the expectations on full-time placement.

Publication practices of English language occupational therapy journals

The aim of this study was to determine the characteristics and publication practices of English language occupational therapy journals. An adapted version of the Survey of Editors Regarding Publishing Practices was posted to the editors of English language occupational therapy journals (n = 14) in September 2001. The response rate was 92.9% (n = 13). Journals were published on average 4.77 times per year and comprised 89% text and 10% advertising. The preferred average length of manuscripts was 20 pages using American Psychological Association format. The average acceptance rate of unsolicited manuscripts was 46.6%. All the journals were peer-reviewed publications and 80% were research oriented. The most frequently cited reasons for rejection of manuscripts were methodology problems, poorly developed idea, poorly written and data interpretation problems. The professional focus of published manuscripts was on research and the clinical foci were on paediatrics, gerontology and physical medicine. The study concludes that there are a variety of publishing opportunities available to occupational therapists. It is essential that prospective authors consult the journal guidelines for authors, including the types of manuscript accepted.

A framework for systematically improving occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity

Aim: To present an evidence-based framework to improve the quality of occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity for litigation, compensation and insurance purposes. Methods: Grounded theory methodology was used to collect and analyse data from a sample of 31 participants, comprising 19 occupational therapists, 6 medical specialists and 6 lawyers. A focused semistructured interview was completed with each participant. In addition, 20 participants verified the key findings. Results: The framework is contextualised within a medicolegal system requiring increasing expertise. The framework consists of (i) broad professional development strategies and principles, and (ii) specific strategies and principles for improving opinions through reporting and assessment practices. Conclusions: The synthesis of the participants' recommendations provides systematic guidelines for improving occupational therapy expert opinion on work capacity.

Correcting for numerator/denominator bias when assessing changing inequalites in occupational class mortality, Australia 1981-2002

Objective Comparisons of the changing patterns of inequalities in occupational mortality provide one way to monitor the achievement of equity goals. However, previous comparisons have not corrected for numerator/denominator bias, which is a consequence of the different ways in which occupational details are recorded on death certificates and on census forms. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of this bias on mortality rates and ratios over time. Methods Using data provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, we examined the evidence for bias over the period 1981-2002, and used imputation methods to adjust for this bias. We compared unadjusted with imputed rates of mortality for manual/non-manual workers. Findings Unadjusted data indicate increasing inequality in the age-adjusted rates of mortality for manual/non-manual workers during 1981-2002, Imputed data suggest that there have been modest fluctuations in the ratios of mortality for manual/non-manual workers during this time, but with evidence that inequalities have increased only in recent years and are now at historic highs. Conclusion We found that imputation for missing data leads to changes in estimates of inequalities related to social class in mortality for some years but not for others. Occupational class comparisons should be imputed or otherwise adjusted for missing data on census or death certificates.