This study investigated the validity of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) when included as one of the scales used by therapists with older adults on an inpatient sub-acute rehabilitation setting. Quantitative data from 36 participants in a sub-acute rehabilitation setting was obtained via the COPM, the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) using a pre-post methodology. Pearson's r correlations and linear regression analyses were computed. The COPM Performance admission score was significantly correlated with the FIM Total and FIM Physical admission scores (p <.05) while the COPM Satisfaction admission score was significantly correlated with the FIM Total and FIM Physical admission scores (p <.05). The COPM Performance discharge score was significantly associated with the FIM Total, FIM Physical, and SF-36 Physical Health discharge scores (p <.01) while the COPM Satisfaction discharge scores was significantly associated with the FIM Total, FIM Physical, and SF-36 Physical Health discharge scores (p<.01) respectively. Linear regression analyses determined that the COPM's Performance admission score uniquely explained 8.4% of the SF-36 Physical Health discharge score's total variance (p <.05). The results contribute to the COPM's evidence base, supporting its convergent validity and predictive validity.

No abstract

Background: Within the Allied Health Department at Casey Hospital, in Melbourne, Australia, a need for the development of an interdisciplinary care model was identified. The belief was that such a model would improve patient outcomes and staff ability to provide high-quality care. Objective: To outline the steps that were taken in developing, mapping, and formulating the Casey Allied Health Model of Interdisciplinary Care (CAHMIC). Methods: A mixed-methods approach consisted of a review of the relevant peer-reviewed literature, staff surveys, focus groups and quantitative data collection to investigate the scope of interdisciplinary practice that allied health staff provided. Findings: An initial survey involving 52 allied health staff revealed a high level of agreement between current practice and the existing literature identifying excellence in interdisciplinary care. A quantitative data collection over a 1-month period indicated that staff provided interdisciplinary care 49% of the time. From four focus groups they conducted, the authors identified five emergent themes about interdisciplinary care: interdisciplinary practice; effective interdisciplinary team structure and processes; collaboration; organisational culture; and outcomes. From these findings, the Casey Allied Health Model of Interdisciplinary Care (CAHMIC) was formulated. Conclusions: This research adds to the literature by investigating and describing the key components of an interdisciplinary team in terms of its structure and function, and how these attributes are perceived to contribute to the team members’ strong identification with, and valuing of, the model of care. The CAHMIC showed a high level of agreement with existing literature that identifies excellence in interdisciplinary care. The model has generated positive outcomes for staff and positive benefits for patient care. Other health services may find the CAHMIC to be a useful point of reference when investigating the interdisciplinary care they provide.

No abstract

No abstract