Arley, I appreciate your comments but from my perspective, using "prep" techniques "enroute to addressing occupation based deficits" is not much different than what phy dys OT's have been doing for years. The only thing that I see different is the use of the word "occupation".
It's my opinion that as OT's, its imperative that treatment be directed towards empowering patients to engage in SPECIFIC occupational deficits. There must be a DIRECT corollary between our goals and our treatment. I do not think that treatment modalities directed to remediate physical dysfunction so that a person might engage in occupation is best practice. In fact, that sort upside down treatment is EXACTLY what OT has been doing for years. Also, I think the OT perspective should be that "the root of the problem" is not physical dysfunction but occupational dysfunction. Ron Ron Carson MHS, OT ----- Original Message ----- From: Johnson, Arley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subj: [OTlist] Advance for OT Article: Point #3 JA> I would like to start by asking this question: If an OT is JA> treating a stroke patient and uses neurofacilitation strategies in JA> their treatment or a peds therapist performs prepping techniques JA> prior to her play activities, is there a difference when an OT JA> uses PAMs and strengthening exercises with the ortho population en JA> route to addressing occupation based deficits? I think we need to JA> address the root of the problem by appropriate means and then JA> bring it home to the patient during and after every session to a JA> functional, meaningful implication/connection. -- Options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
