A  while back on another list serve, I must have been ranting about OT's
and  UE  practice  because  someone asked me "why don't you find another
profession".  I just found the following draft which is a reply to their
comment.

It's  not  very  eloquent but I think it gets the point across. I didn't
send  it  to  the "other list" but in light of my recent questions about
mobility, I want to send it to the OTlist.

Ron

***********************************************************************

Another  OT  suggest that I should move to another profession because in
my  experience,  meaningful  return  of  an  UE  shortly  after a CVA is
unlikely.  As  I've  already  said, this is my experience and it's how I
practice.  But  why  would  another  OT  think  that  my  experience  is
indicative of being a "poor" therapist or being in the wrong profession.
Well, as you can imagine, I have an opinion. Probably another one that's
going to raise a few eyebrows.

In   my  years  as  a  therapist,  I  observe  that  in  adult  physical
dysfunction,  OT's  do  one  of  two  things:  UE  rehab  and/or  ADL's.
Personally,  I  don't  agree  with either of these roles. In my opinion,
within  the  confines  of our State practice acts, scope of practice and
personal  experience/training,  our  role  is to facilitate occupational
performance. Our role is not to teach people how to dress themselves, or
how  to  better  use  their  arm  after  a  stroke. Our role is to FOCUS
treatment  (i.e.  the  outcome) on improving peoples' quality of life by
improving their ability to engage in occupation. Let me explain then why
I think that FOCUSING treatment on an UE is not best practice.

Firstly,  return  of  arm  function  after a stroke is notoriously poor.
Often,   the   return   that  comes  is  independent  of  any  treatment
intervention.  And  yet,  many  OT's  labor  away  at  doing  exercises,
treatments  and  interventions  to  facilitate  UE return. Evidence does
support that some return does occur because of early intervention, but I
know  of no evidence showing that early intervention makes a significant
difference  in patient's ability to utilize their arm for taking care of
themselves, being productive or having fun.

When  working in stroke rehab, it is rare to have a patient with only UE
involvement. Primarily, pt's with sensory/motor symptoms have it in both
UE and LE. When facing patient's with this "global" involvement, OT seem
to  pigeonhole  themselves into working only on patients UE. The obvious
explanation  for  this phenomena is that in rehab where there is both OT
and  PT,  the  old adage holds true: "OT, above the waist, PT, below the
waist".  I have never agreed with this concept because I think following
it does the patient a great disservice. So, what should we do?

In  my  experience, the vast majority of patients with new CVA's want to
be  able  to  re-engage in their occupations, not from a wheelchair, but
while  standing  and walking. In my experience, if you ask a CVA patient
if  they want to work on their arm or their mobility, they almost always
answer  with  mobility.  I understand this! If I lost use of both my arm
and  leg  because  of  a  stroke, I would be most concerned with my leg!
After  all,  a  person  can  eat  with  1  1/2 arms, but they can't very
effectively  walk with 1 1/2 legs. OT's are not gait experts, all though
I  think  we  should  be,  but  we are experts in occupation. And we are
supposed to be client-centered. So, when faced with patients who want to
engage  in  mobility  related daily living skills, what should an OT do?
Should  they  work on their arm with the pretense that doing so is going
to  improve  their mobility? Or should they get right to work addressing
the  very issues that prevent the patient from engaging in occupation in
a way that is both desired and achievable?

To me the answer is obvious! We need to address patient's where they are
at and where they want to be! I understand that "turf" issues associated
with  what I'm saying, but that's just part of treating patients from an
occupational  perspective. I understand that many OT's are uncomfortable
trying  different  ambulatory aids but with training and practice, their
comfort  level  with  increase.  There  are  so many goals that OT's can
address  that include mobility, something important to patients, without
actually  stepping  on other professions' toes. But they must be willing
to address patient's mobility related goals.

I  think  that  a  disclaimer is order. What I've written is based on my
experience and are generalities. With a few exceptions, there are almost
no  guarantees,  certainties  or "rules" when it comes to patient's with
CVA.

~The End~



-- 
Options?
  www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com 

Archive?
  www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

**************************************************************************************
Enroll in Boston University's post-professional Master of Science for OTs 
Online. Gain the skills and credentials to propel your career.
www.otdegree.com/otn
**************************************************************************************

Reply via email to