Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Gepubliceerd in:
Beroepsvorming ergotherapie in België en Nederland hoofdstuk lezen eerste hoofdstuk lezen

2023 | OriginalPaper | Hoofdstuk

16. Ergotherapiemodellen, een inleiding

Auteurs : Annerie Zalmstra, MLIC, Prof. dr. Daphne Kos

Gepubliceerd in: Grondslagen van ergotherapie

Uitgeverij: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Samenvatting

Dit hoofdstuk bevat een beschrijving van de kern van ergotherapie: het paradigma, de missie en de visie, die het bestaansrecht van het beroep vormen. Deze kern is zichtbaar in de inhouds- en procesmodellen die ergotherapeuten gebruiken om professioneel redeneren toe te passen bij handelingsvragen. Veelgebruikte modellen worden besproken. Ergotherapeuten maken daarbij ook gebruik van concepten, raamwerken, classificaties en taxonomieën. Om concreet met personen, organisaties of gemeenschappen aan de slag te gaan heeft de ergotherapeut methoden ofwel interventies nodig. De ergotherapeut onderbouwt het professioneel redeneren over en de concrete aanpak van een handelingsvraag voortdurend vanuit theorie, wetenschappelijke kennis en referentiekaders. De samenhang hiertussen wordt toegelicht.
vorige hoofdstuk Spelen en vrije tijd
volgende hoofdstuk Person-Environment-Occupation (PEO)-model
Literatuur
1.
Townsend E, Polatajko, H. Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists, CAOT. Enabling occupation II: Advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being & justice through occupation. Ottawa, Canadia: Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists Publications; 2007.
2.
World Health Organization W. WHO global disability action plan 2014–2021. Better health for all people with disability. Switzerland; 2015.
3.
World Federation of Occupational Therapsists (WFOT). Position statement: Occupational Therapy and Human Rights; 2019.
4.
5.
6.
Foundations for practice in occupational therapy, 6th edition. UK: Elsevier; 2020.
7.
Paralyzed Veterans of America Consortium for Spinal Cord M. Preservation of upper limb function following spinal cord injury: a clinical practice guideline for health-care professionals. J Spinal Cord Med. 2005;28:434–70.
8.
Duncan E. Foundations for practice in occupational therapy. 6th ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2021.
9.
Kielhofner G. Conceptual foundations of occupational therapy, 4th edition. Philadelpia: F.A. Davis Company; 2009.
10.
Law MC BA, Strong S, Stewart D, Rigby P, Letts L. The person-environment-occupation model: a transactive approach to occupational performance. Can J Occup Ther. 1996;63:9–23.
11.
Fisher AG. Uniting practice and theory in an occupational framework. Am J Occup Ther. 1998;52:509–21.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Kuiper J, Zijsling P. Methodisch handelen inzichtelijk. Amsterdam: Boom uitgevers; 2020.
13.
Turpin M, Iwama MK. Using occupational therapy models in practice. A field guide. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier; 2011.
14.
15.
Joosten AV. Contemporary occupational therapy: our occupational therapy models are essential to occupation centred practice. Aust Occup Ther J. 2015;62:219–22.CrossRefPubMed
16.
17.
Van ’t Leven N, Groenewoud H, De Lange J. Mogelijkheden voor een dementievriendelijke woning, buurt en omgeving onderzocht in VitaDem. Rotterdam: Kenniscentrum Zorginnovatie, Hogeschool Rotterdam; 2018.
18.
Bjørkedal STB, Bejerholm U, Eplov LF, Møller T. Meaningful Activities and Recovery (MA&R): the effect of a novel rehabilitation intervention among persons with psychiatric disabilities on activity engagement-study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020;21:789.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Pierce D. Occupational science for occupational therapy: Slack Inc., 2013.
20.
Royal College of Occupational Therapists (RCOT). Learning and development standards for pre-registration education. Revised Edition 2019. 2019.
21.
Davis R, Campbell R, Hildon Z, Hobbs L, Michie S. Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: a scoping review. Health Psychol Rev. 2015;9:323–44.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall; 1986.
23.
Fox V. An exploration of social participation for young adults following a first psychotic episode. J Occup Sci. 2020;27:69–81.CrossRef
24.
25.
Ashby S, Chandler B. An exploratory study of the occupation-focused models included in occupational therapy professional education programmes. Br J Occup Ther. 2010;73:616–24.CrossRef
26.
Wong SR, Fisher G. Comparing and using occupation-focused models. Occup Ther Health Care. 2015;29:297–315.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Chapparo C, Ranka J. Theoretical contexts. In: Whiteford G, Wright-St Clair V, editors. Sydney: Churchill Livingstone; 2005.
28.
Christiansen C, Townsend E. Introduction to occupation: the art and science of living, 2nd edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson; 2011.
29.
Wilcock A. An occupational perspective on health, 2nd edition. Thorofare, NJ: Slack; 2006.
30.
Whiteford G, Wright-St CV. Occupation & practice in context. Sydney: Churchill Livingstone; 2005.
31.
Kronenberg F, Pollard N, Sakellariou D. Occupational therapies without borders, Vol 2: Towards an ecology of occup-based practices. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2011.
32.
Mosey AC. Occupational therapy: the configuration of a profession. New York: Raven Press; 1981.
33.
Mosey A. The proper focus of scientific inquiry in occupational therapy: frames of reference. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health. 1989;9:195–201.
34.
Foster M. Theoretical frameworks. In: Turner A, Foster M, Johnson S, eds. Occupational therapy and physical dysfunction. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1997, pp. 27–59.
35.
Craik J, Davis J, Polatajko H. Introducing the Canadian practice process framework (CPPF): Amplifying the context. In: Townsend EA, Polatajko HJ, editors. Enabling occupation II: advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, well-being, and justice through occupation. Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE; 2013. pp. 13–36.
36.
Philippa M, Debrabandere F, Quak A, Schoonheim T, Van der Sijs N. Etymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands. Amsterdam; 2009.
37.
American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA). Occupational therapy practice framework: domain and process, 4th edition. Am J Occup Ther. 2020;74.
38.
Whiteford G, Jones K, Rahal C, Suleman A. The participatory occupational justice framework as a tool for change: three contrasting case narratives. J Occup Sci. 2018;25:497–508.CrossRef
39.
Dsouza S, Galvaan R, Ramugondo EL. Concepts in occupational therapy understanding southern perspectives. India: Manipal University Press; 2017.
40.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
41.
Assiociation AP. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.CrossRef
42.
Polatajko H, Davis J, Hobson S, et al. Meeting the responsibility that comes with the privilege: introducing a taxonomic code for understanding occupation. Can J Occup Ther Revue Canadienne D’ergothérapie. 2005;71:261–8.CrossRef
43.
Center for Innovative OT Solutions C. Assessment of motor and process skills: volume II – user manual, 8th edition. Colorado: Three Star Press, Inc.; 2014.
Metagegevens
Titel
Ergotherapiemodellen, een inleiding
Auteurs
Annerie Zalmstra, MLIC
Prof. dr. Daphne Kos
Copyright
2023
Uitgeverij
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Boek
Grondslagen van ergotherapie

Print ISBN: 978-90-368-2828-4

Elektronisch ISBN: 978-90-368-2829-1

Copyright: 2023

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-368-2829-1_16