Collaborative practice with parents in occupational therapy for children: A scoping review

Abstract

IntroductionIn childhood intervention, parent–therapist collaboration is central to the family‐centred approach. Despite long‐standing discussion in occupational therapy literature, the field faces challenges, including inconsistent terminology and difficulties in translating theory into practice. This paper represents the first part of a comprehensive scoping review study aimed at developing foundational concepts for collaborative practices with parents in occupational therapy for children. Therefore, this paper focusses on mapping existing practices, types, and approaches articulated in the literature.MethodsWe searched English‐language sources published worldwide from 1998 to 2022 discussing collaborative practices with parents in occupational therapy for children aged 0–10 with any diagnosis, including multidisciplinary practices. Seven databases were searched. Data from peer‐reviewed indexed literature, theses and dissertations, and book chapters were extracted and analysed through basic numerical and descriptive analyses before being synthesised into similar categories. The Joanna Briggs Institute Manual and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analysis—extension for Scoping Reviews were used.ResultsThe scoping review yielded 299 papers. Parent–therapist collaboration was prominent in clinics, family homes, schools, and hospitals, particularly during therapy implementation, goal setting, and planning. Most reported practice types included ‘interventions with parent engagement’, ‘parent‐directed interventions’, and ‘parent education’. ‘Family‐centred’, ‘occupational‐focussed’, and ‘client–therapist collaborative’ approaches were frequently mentioned. There were inconsistencies in the terms used to describe collaborative practice characteristics.ConclusionOver the past 24 years, the collaborative practice literature has expanded and evolved, with parent–therapist collaboration observed across various occupational therapy settings. Inconsistencies in this collaboration across different therapeutic stages were revealed, which could impact intervention success and sustainability. Further research is needed to explore parent–therapist collaboration mechanisms within and across stages. This scoping review also underscores the need for a common framework to guide practice and research.PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYThis literature review explores how occupational therapists and parents work together in childhood intervention. Collaboration is essential for understanding and meeting children's needs within their family and community settings. However, occupational therapists and parents face challenges in applying family‐centred practices and using a common language to bridge theory with practice. To address these challenges, we examined 299 papers published between 1998 and 2022 to understand how collaborative practices with parents have been described in the literature. Our review revealed that therapists and parents collaborate across various settings, such as clinics, schools, homes, and hospitals, mainly during therapy sessions, goal setting, and planning interventions. Collaborative practices take different forms. For instance, therapists often encourage parents to actively engage and take the lead in therapy, requiring therapists to recognise and respect parents' priorities and learning preferences. They often develop strategies together to support the child within family routines. While we found several studies on therapist–parent collaboration, the review outlined inconsistencies in how this practice was described and applied, which could affect its success. Therefore, more research is needed to understand the best ways in which collaboration can occur at each stage of therapy. The need for a core guideline for collaborative practice with parents in occupational therapy was also observed. While therapist–parent collaboration is used in occupational therapy for children, there is a clear need to minimise inconsistencies and gaps found in the literature, as well as to ensure a common language to promote intervention quality and success.