Browsing by Person "Henderson, S. E."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Pain and Function: Occupational Therapists' Use of Orthotics in Rheumatoid Arthritis
(College of Occupational Therapists, 2002-04) Henderson, S. E.; McMillan, Ian R.
The use of orthotics in the management of rheumatoid arthritis appears to be relatively commonplace within occupational therapy departments. The aim of this study was to identify the frequency of orthotic use by occupational therapists, their beliefs about the efficacy of orthotic use, what they aimed to achieve by orthotic provision and any outcome measures used. The total membership of the British Association of Hand Therapists who were both occupational therapists and self-identified as working and/or having an interest in rheumatology (n = 132) were surveyed through a postal questionnaire. Of the responses received (n = 89, 67%), all the respondents (100%) were regular users of orthotics in the management of rheumatoid arthritis. The results showed that the most highly rated reasons for orthotic provision were to decrease hand and wrist pain and to improve hand function. Subjective comments from the respondents provided evidence of positive beliefs about the efficacy of orthotic use, despite a lack of objective outcome measures to support such comment. Given the complexity of the intervening variables that occur with orthotic use, perhaps there is no easy answer; however, with the expectation of evidence-based practice and intervention, it is suggested that an increased use of standardised outcome measures may provide additional strength in presenting, often subjective, evidence.
To PhD or not to PhD - where do we work is the question?
(College of Occupational Therapists, 2003-10-01) Maciver, Donald; Henderson, S. E.
The points that Barnitt (2002) raises are of fundamental importance to the continuing development of the profession of occupational therapy as they highlight the need for sound, evidence-based practice. This is further acknowledged in Section 5.6.3 of the profession's own code of ethics (COT 1995), where it is suggested that 'occupational therapists have a duty to ensure that, wherever possible, their professional practice is based on established research findings' (pg 14). It could be suggested that this need is at odds with the current research capacity of occupational therapy. Bannigan, discussing this issue, (2001:425) poses the question 'is research valued as a legitimate career pathway in occupational therapy?' It would appear, from her own analysis of the question, that it is not. She believes research is seen as 'the last resort option for the unskilled, no-hopers of the profession', and that it is seen as a career pathway for those who would fail as clinicians. Citing Ilott and White (2001), she suggests that a compounding difficulty lies with the limited post-doctoral opportunities available for occupational therapists. This topic, i.e. the issue limited post-doctoral opportunities available for occupational therapists, is the main focus of this article.