Research Article
Issue Date: December 12, 2016
Published Online: December 12, 2016
Updated: June 13, 2018
Alignment of Outcome Instruments Used in Hand Therapy With the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: A Scoping Review
Danielle Ann-Marie Lesher; M. J. Mulcahey; Peter Hershey; Donna Breger Stanton; Andrea C. Tiedgen
Author Affiliations
  • Danielle Ann-Marie Lesher, OTD, OTR/L, is Practitioner, Penn State Health, Hershey, PA; dlesher1@hmc.psu.edu
  • M. J. Mulcahey, PhD, OTR/L, is Professor, Occupational Therapy, Jefferson School of Health Professions, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA
  • Peter Hershey, OTD, CHT, is Practitioner, Hershey Occupational Therapy and Hand Therapy, Harleysville, PA
  • Donna Breger Stanton, OTD, OTR/L, is Associate Professor and Academic Fieldwork Coordinator, Samuel Merritt University, Oakland, CA
  • Andrea C. Tiedgen, MOT, OTR/L, is Practitioner, Penn State Health, Hershey, PA
Article Information
Hand and Upper Extremity / Health and Wellness / Occupational Therapy Practice Framework / Professional Issues / Rehabilitation, Participation, and Disability / Special Issue: Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 12, 2016
Alignment of Outcome Instruments Used in Hand Therapy With the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: A Scoping Review
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, December 2016, Vol. 71, 7101190060. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2017.016741
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, December 2016, Vol. 71, 7101190060. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2017.016741
Abstract

OBJECTIVE. We sought to identify outcome instruments used in rehabilitation of the hand and upper extremity; to determine their alignment with the constructs of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process; and to report gaps in the constructs measured by outcome instruments as a basis for future research.

METHOD. We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, OTseeker, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using scoping review methodology and evaluated outcome instruments for concordance with the ICF and the Framework.

RESULTS. We identified 18 outcome instruments for analysis. The findings pertain to occupational therapists’ focus on body functions, body structures, client factors, and activities of daily living; a gap in practice patterns in use of instruments; and overestimation of the degree to which instruments used are occupationally based.

CONCLUSION. Occupational therapy practitioners should use outcome instruments that embody conceptual frameworks for classifying function and activity.