Premium
Routine outcome measurement in practice: Overcoming challenges, seeking solutions, demonstrating impact
Author(s) -
Duncan Edward
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
australian occupational therapy journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.595
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1440-1630
pISSN - 0045-0766
DOI - 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2011.00951.x
Subject(s) - outcome (game theory) , psychology , medical education , patient reported outcome , clinical practice , affect (linguistics) , medline , occupational therapy , medicine , nursing , psychotherapist , political science , psychiatry , quality of life (healthcare) , mathematics , mathematical economics , communication , law
First paragraph: Never more so than today has the need for therapists to demonstrate the impact of their practice been so vital. And yet, while routine use of outcome measurement to show the difference that therapy makes to peoples' lives has been recommended for at least 20 years (Ellwood, 1988), it often appears an elusive quest and remains a topical subject (Unsworth, 2011). Why is it that the routine selection, usage and reporting of outcome measures are such a challenge? Recently, with colleagues, I have been systematically reviewing the international literature to investigate the facilitators and barriers of routine outcome measurement use within the Allied Health Professions. While many of the papers we reviewed were from related professions, their key themes (Knowledge, Education and Interest; Support and Priority and Practical Considerations) resonate with issues that directly affect occupational therapy practice, and provide interesting food for thought