Ron, Is it possible that the way the referral is phrased to indicate a physical dysfunction is simply because the referrer does not know/understand the concepts of occupational performance and occupational deficit, and therefore cannot write the referral from that perspective??
Maybe an opportunity for educating some of our fellow professionals? Just a thought... Nessa ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Carson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Dana Levinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:15 PM Subject: Re: Ron - Occupational Splinting? > Splinting is not unique to the domain of OT. ALL my treatment is based the > the Occupational Performance Process Model. The OPPM is a 7-stage process > outlining OT assessment, intervention and discharge. The first step of the > process is to Name, Validate and Prioritize occupational performance > deficits. Within this model, if a client does NOT have occupational > performance deficits, there is NO role for OT. > > Applying this model to your case yields an answer that I would refer to PT. > I would only splint a patient is I could demonstrate that splinting would > improve a SPECIFIC occupational deficit. If I am splinting because my > primary concern is portioning, ROM, pain, etc, then I don't see how this is > occupational therapy. > > If you believe that increasing a client's ROM will improve their > occupational performance, then isn't PT doing occupational therapy if they > increase a client's ROM? Within the OPPM model, if occupation is not the > primary deficit, then there is NO role for OT. Keep in mind that > occupational deficits certainly do result because of physical dysfunction, > but focusing on the physical dysfunction instead of the occupational > dysfunction is PT, not OT. > > Ron *********ой*********** Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist ** List messages are archived at: http://www.mail-archive.com/otlist@otnow.com *********ой***********
