Introduction: Although working with communities using community-centred approaches like community development has been identified as an important occupational therapy domain of practice, occupational therapists continue to struggle to clarify their roles and processes in this area of practice. From a study that aimed to describe the practice process of occupational therapists working in community development, this article presents key findings regarding how occupational therapists described their work with individuals and communities, providing a conceptualization of how to situate their work with individuals within a broad community context. Method: Using interpretive description, individual interviews and focus group discussions were conducted via telephone with 12 occupational therapists from across Canada between February 2014 and March 2015. Results: There was some uncertainty amongst participants regarding the definition of community development. Four layers of community-centred practice were inductively derived from the data: individual, group, community of interest, and systems. The latter two touch on community development. Conclusion: The conceptualization that emerged from this study can assist occupational therapists in reflecting on current practice and furthering an appreciation of how their work with individuals can include a community focus, responding to calls within the profession to look beyond the individual.

Background. Little research has focused on the application of the Canadian Practice Process Framework (CPPF) to occupational therapists' work in community development (CD). Purpose. This study sought to describe Canadian occupational therapists' CD practice processes. Method. Using interpretive description, Canadian occupational therapists engaged in CD practice participated in an initial interview and follow-up interview or focus group. Content analysis was used to analyze the data. Findings. Eight occupational therapists participated in describing a process that focused on five key elements: (1) getting to know the community, (2) getting the ball rolling/planning together, (3) building (upon) occupational opportunities, (4) revisiting the approach, and (5) striving for sustainability. These elements occurred within a practice context and frames of reference related to CD practice. Implications. Participants outlined a process that was less discrete than the CPPF and highlighted the knowledge and skills needed along with the less tangible attitudes/approaches required to engage with communities. Abré gé Description. Peu de recherches ont été menées sur l'application du Modèle canadien du processus de pratique (MCPP) au travail des ergothérapeutes dans le domaine du développement communautaire (DC). But. Cette étude visait à décrire les processus de pratique des ergothérapeutes canadiens dans le domaine du DC. Mé thodologie. À l'aide de la description interprétative, des ergothérapeutes canadiens travaillant en DC ont participé à une entrevue initiale et une entrevue de suivi ou à un groupe de discussion. Une analyse du contenu a été effectuée pour analyser les données. Ré sultats. Huit ergothérapeutes ont participé à l'étude en décrivant un processus centré sur cinq éléments clés: (1) apprendre à connaître la communauté, (2) mettre le processus en marche/planifier ensemble, (3) s'appuyer sur les possibilités occupationnelles, (4) revisiter l'approche, et (5) rechercher la pérennité. Ces éléments se sont manifestés dans le contexte de pratique et dans des cadres de référence associés à la pratique en DC. Consé quences. Les participants ont décrit un processus qui était moins discret que le MCPP et ils ont mis en relief les connaissances et compétences requises, de même que les attitudes/approches moins tangibles requises pour oeuvrer auprès des communautés.

Background: Pre-licensure interprofessional education prepares students for collaborative client-centred practice. However, most interprofessional educational efforts are aimed at developing the collaborative component of practice. The purpose of this article is to share the findings of a study that explored occupational therapy students' client-centred development, in order to inform other pre-licensure educators about integrating client-centredness into uni-and interprofessional education contexts.

No abstract

As eldercare forefronts mainstream news media during the COVID-19 pandemic, these media accounts may draw on and/or further reshape public understandings of home care in Canada. A frame analysis informed by critical discourse theory was used to examine 56 English-language articles related to home care (March 2020–March 2021). Home care is often “tacked on” to discussions of long-term residential care and is constructed by what it is not, by what it is a preferred alternative to, and by what it might circumvent (i.e., neglect, contagion). Infused with taken-for-granted meanings and linked to population aging and system crisis, home care is positioned as the progressive future of Canadian eldercare. Although home care investment is a common call, at times the gravity of the problem is imbalanced against small-scale individualistic solutions. Inequities of home spaces and impacts on families are obscured, with homes characterized as idealized places of dignity and (relative) safety. Older adults are positioned as vulnerable, passive victims, in contrast to their benevolent helpers. The authors discuss how we can clarify and strengthen political advocacy and public discourse around eldercare without reinforcing compassionate ageism, apocalyptic demography, and fear of aging while recognizing the nuances around receiving care in either home or residential settings.