Fill - Free fillable CE Article November 2019 PDF form

CE-1

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE-1

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019

Occupational Performance Coaching

as an Ultimate Facilitator

Diana Gantman Kraversky, OTD, MS, OTR/L, AP

Assistant Professor, OTD/MSOT Programs, West Coast University, Center

for Graduate Studies, Los Angeles, CA

This article was developed in collaboration with AOTA’s Children & Youth

Special Interest Section.

ABSTRACT

The importance of parental involvement in intervention with

children has long been recognized (Foster et al., 2013). Current

trends in pediatric occupational therapy service delivery have

been directed toward occupation-based and family-centered care,

with a principal component of this approach being caregiver–

therapist collaboration in planning and evaluating intervention

addressing occupational performance deficits (Foster et al., 2013;

King et al., 2017).

At the same time, it is a well-substantiated fact that widely

used traditional caregiver education methods often do not pro-

duce the desired results and do not promote generalization and

transfer of the intervention gains to the home and community

environments (Bagby et al., 2012; Bulkeley et al., 2016). In these

cases the caregivers frequently do not feel empowered and lose

site of the therapeutic value of occupational therapy interventions

(Foster et al., 2013).

The aim of this article is to describe occupational performance

coaching (OPC) as an alternative approach to intervention

congruent with occupation- and family-centered practice. OPC

is occupation-centered intervention for working with caregivers

to achieve occupational performance goals for their children and

themselves. OPC is appropriate when children’s performance

depends on the context, and caregivers have goals relating to their

own performance in terms of improving family life and support-

ing their children’s occupational mastery and participation in

their life contexts (Graham et al., 2009; Graham et al., 2015).

This article provides realistic, useful techniques to implement

OPC in daily practice as an occupation-centered intervention

approach that helps parents recognize and implement social and

physical environmental changes that support more successful

occupational performance for themselves and their children.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After reading this article, you should be able to:

1. Discuss the major principles of OPC

2. Identify the theoretical basis for OPC

3. Distinguish major differences between traditional caregiver

education methods and OPC

4. Describe domains, session format, and techniques used during

the OPC implementation process

5. Incorporate OPC techniques into the occupational therapy

intervention process

INTRODUCTION

Occupational performance coaching (OPC) has been described

in literature as “an intervention for working with parents

to achieve occupational performance goals for themselves

and their children” (Graham & Rodger, 2010, p. 212). In

this approach, the practitioners guide parents in developing

strategies and supports to meet self-identified goals related to

their family’s needs (Graham et al., 2010, 2013, 2014). OPC

focuses specifically on enabling children’s and parents’ partic-

ipation in occupations in the home and community through

practitioner-guided but parent-identified solutions to occupa-

tional performance barriers. The practitioners employ specific

language, questioning, and reflection cues to promote parents’

guided discovery of solutions, and their evaluation and imple-

mentation within a problem-solving framework. Provisions

facilitating generalizing and transferring skills are implanted

within the intervention process.

Certain interpersonal aspects of OPC are similar to interven-

tions used in cognitive approaches (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi,

2000), yet OPC is rooted in such theoretical premises as occu-

pation-centered practice focused on enabling participation and

family-centered care.

The occupation-centered (top-down) approach to occupa-

tional therapy practice refers to interventions that use engage-

ment in occupation as the primary means of assessment,

intervention, and measurement of outcomes (Trombly, 1993).

A top-down approach makes the association between interven-

tion and occupational goals clear to the family and emphasizes

Earn .1 AOTA CEU

(one contact hour and

1.25 NBCOT PDU).

See page CE-7 for details.

CE -2

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE Article, exam, and certificate

are also available ONLINE.

call toll-free 877-404-AOTA (2682).

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019

participation within the natural environments. OPC conforms

to these requirements. OPC facilitates improved occupational

performance by assisting parents to recognize and modify barri-

ers limiting their own or their children’s performance (Graham

et al., 2017).

Family-centered practice is a broad practice philosophy that

is widely recognized and used in occupational therapy and other

disciplines as best practice for children and families (Baird &

Peterson, 1997; Graham et al., 2009). Within a family-centered

practice framework, the practitioners interact with parents as

associates and guides who believe in the parents’ abilities and

provide timely, practical information (Harrison et al., 2007;

Washington & Schwartz, 1996). OPC employs a goal-focused

conversation methodology in which most of the therapist’s time

is spent questioning, listening, and gently guiding caregivers

(Graham et al., 2013).

During the OPC process, practitioners guide caregivers to

identify possible modifications within their home or community

performance context (e.g., changes to the sequence of tasks in

the bedtime routine or seating arrangement during homework

activities) to create a better match between the person, the

occupation, and the environment, and, ultimately, to improve

occupational performance (American Occupational Therapy

Association [AOTA], 2014; Law et al., 1996).

Through collaboration between the therapist and the care-

giver, and dynamic performance analysis of the child’s and/or

caregiver’s occupational performance, the caregivers learn to

identify actions facilitating achieving goals and generalizing

and transferring skills. The ultimate objective of OPC is to

enable occupational performance in the areas identified as

goals and improve caregivers’ skills to independently manage

future occupational performance barriers (Graham et al.,

2013, 2014).

Occupational therapy research supports OPC intervention

as a way to increase participation of children with special

needs (Dunn et al., 2012; Foster et al., 2013; Graham et al.,

2015). Therefore, coaching practices have become more and

more prevalent. Although the literature provides evidence on

the effectiveness of OPC, modest information exists about

the fidelity of implementing OPC. Through better under-

standing OPC techniques, practices can be refined to develop

a coaching protocol that will enhance consistency among

practitioners and will meet the individual needs of parents

and clients.

OPC is appropriate for situations when caregivers are moti-

vated to improve their own occupational performance along

with performance of their children’s participation in daily activ-

ities, routines, and roles (AOTA, 2014; Graham et al., 2010).

Additionally, OPC is effective when children’s performance

depends on the environment where it occurs (AOTA, 2014).

OPC is indicated for caregivers of children with a wide range

of performance issues, from mild to severe, and within various

occupational domains (AOTA, 2014).

According to Graham and colleagues (2010), OPC is suitable

when children are physically or emotionally healthy and when

caregivers present with sufficient cognitive and language skills,

and stable mental and adequate physical health, and they are

motivated to participate in the coaching process.

Differences Between Traditional Caregiver Methods and OPC

Based on the previously discussed principles, it is evident that

fundamental differences between OPC and traditional meth-

odologies used in implementing caregiver education occur in

the focus and the means. Caregiver education and training is

typically led by an OT, usually based on the client’s current

goals, and accords with the current, pre-established therapeu-

tic program. Characteristically, this results in the caregiver

independently translating knowledge to provide assistance to

the child in this particular episode of care (Miller-Kuhaneck &

Watling, 2018).

In contrast, OPC is a shared process that uses collaborative

performance analysis, observations in natural environments (in

person or via digital recording), reﬂective listening, guidance

and encouragement, and feedback to help caregivers develop

the understanding and necessary skills that enable and empower

them to create their own solutions to meet the child’s and

family’s needs in various current and, most importantly, future

situations and environments (King et al., 2017; Miller-Kuhaneck

& Watling, 2018).

OPC IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

To assist caregivers with developing supportive performance

contexts for their children and the skills needed for them to

create their own solutions for performance barriers, the OT uses

three enabling domains: structured process, emotional support,

and information exchange (Graham et al., 2013, 2014). Table 1

depicts the OPC steps within each domain.

When applying OPC, knowledge of the strategies outlined

in each domain assists the practitioner with understanding

parents’ responses and learning needs, and therefore allows for

adjusting coaching techniques. In addition, the emphasis on

each domain varies among caregivers and at different stages of

the intervention process.

Domain One: Structured Process

This domain provides a broad outline of OPC intervention

sessions. The steps within the structured process domain may

be repeated and revisited at any time during the sessions as

needed (Graham et al., 2013, 2014). These steps are based on

the problem-solving process that is similar to other cognitive

interventions, such as Cognitive Orientation to Daily Occupa-

tional Performance (CO-OP; Dawson et al., 2017).

The therapist explains the rationale for using the prob-

lem-solving process to the caregiver during an initial inter-

vention session. The caregiver is informed that together with

the practitioner, they will explore ways to improve the match

between the child’s abilities with the activity demands and

the performance contexts (AOTA, 2014; Law et al., 1998).

The problem-solving approach emphasizes developing prob-

lem-solving skills and provides the structure for discussions

CE-3

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE-3

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019 ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 

with parents, which helps them realize their occupational per-

formance goals. Making the problem-solving process explicit

to caregivers and integrating their perceptions, ideas, and

actions throughout the problem solving process achieves this.

Problem solving occurs within a supportive relationship in

which caregivers’ self-discovery of solutions to their perfor-

mance issues is facilitated through coaching techniques. This

process is explained to caregivers as a series of steps to guide

their solution exploration (Graham et al., 2013, 2014).

Goal Setting

OPC is the intervention for caregivers and, therefore, the

goals are set in collaboration with parents and are designed

to address their specific priorities and concerns related to

occupational performance of their children, family, and

themselves. Although these goals might not always reflect

the child’s objectives, the caregivers are encouraged to con-

sider the child’s point of view as much as possible (Graham

et al., 2013, 2014).

From experience, typically the first session of OPC is

dedicated to explaining the OPC process and problem-solv-

ing approach, and setting goals. This process may need to be

repeated during the first two or three sessions as caregivers’

priorities are clarified. During the full OPC process, which typ-

ically consists of 8 to 10 sessions, depending on the caregivers’

needs (Graham et al., 2013), the goals are consistently revisited.

Goals that are no longer significant and motivating to caregivers

require adjustment (Rodger & Kennedy-Behr, 2017).

In OPC, the goals focus on occupational performance and

not on the underlying body structures and functions and

skill deficits (AOTA, 2014). Only occupation-based goals

are suitable for OPC intervention, as specific tasks and the

contexts will be addressed to promote change in occupational

performance.

Therefore, the goal should be stated as: “Evelyn will inde-

pendently complete play activities with friends at the neighbor-

hood playground,” not, “Evelyn will improve gross motor skills

to complete sensory motor play tasks.” Additionally, specific

sub-goals or steps are frequently developed to promote overall

goal achievement. Sub-goals describe steps of improvement in

children’s performance in the same way that Goal Attainment

Scale (Kiresuk & Sherman, 1968) steps are described (Graham

et al., 2014).

Collaborative Performance Analysis

Collaborative performance analysis is a specific exploration of

occupational performance based on information exchanged

between the caregiver and the OT. Collaborative performance

analysis includes examining the actual activity or the caregivers’

report of the performance, or a video of the activity as it occurs

in the natural environment. It is typically performed for each

specific occupation identified within the goal.

From experience, two or three goal-directed occupations are

discussed at one time. During the collaborative performance

analysis process, the information is exchanged about the child

and/or caregiver (person), the activity, and the natural con-

text (e.g., social and/or physical), with an emphasis on asking

caregivers what they already know about performance and

minimizing the amount of advice given (AOTA, 2014; Graham

et al., 2013).

Domain 1: Structured Process Domain Domain 2: Emotional Support Domain 3: Information Exchange

Goal Setting Reflective Listening Information on Typical Development

Collaborative Performance Analysis:

(A) Option Exploration

Empathy Information on Condition and Impairments

(B) Action Planning

Reframing Information on Task Analysis

Guiding Teaching and Learning Strategies

(D) Checking Performance

Encouraging

Information on Community and Other

Resources

(E) Generalization

Table 1. Three Enabling Domains and OPC Steps Within Each Domain

CE-4

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE Article, exam, and certificate

are also available ONLINE.

call toll-free 877-404-AOTA (2682).

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019

The OT strives to:

1. Determine what needs to change for the child to become

successful with the activity performance, which corresponds

with the option-exploration strategy within the collaborative

performance analysis.

2. Determine what needs to change for the caregiver to

enable performance (further option exploration and action

planning).

3. Develop the caregivers’ skills to find solutions to their child’s

performance deficits, which corresponds with the implemen-

tation-of-strategies stage (Graham et al., 2013, 2014).

For an example of the collaborative performance analysis pro-

cess, see Table 2.

Collaborative performance analysis could be repeated at any

point in the OPC intervention process based on the caregivers’

goals, learning needs, and strategy development. From experi-

ence, this process takes the majority of time during the inter-

vention sessions after the goals and priorities are set.

Domain Two: Emotional Support

The emotional support domain consists of specific objectives to

(1) listen, (2) empathize, (3) reframe, (4) guide, and (5) encour-

age caregivers to discover solutions that enable goal achieve-

ment (Graham et al., 2013, 2014).

Characteristically, emotional support is frequently crucial,

particularly in the initial stages of OPC, when caregivers often

need to express their frustration before they are ready to discuss

potential solutions to occupational performance deficits. Emo-

tional support meets the caregiver’s need for connection and

develops a trusting relationship with the practitioner which, in

turn, changes the caregiver’s perspective from reactive to proac-

tive (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Graham et al., 2013).

Listening to caregivers without judgment promotes an

in-depth understanding of the performance deficits; outlines

the family’s needs; and, most importantly, sheds light on the

caregiver’s perception and interpretation of the performance

difficulties during typical family routines. Additionally, careful

listening allows the therapist to extract specific examples of

effective problem-solving strategies for further action, validating

and supporting the caregiver’s self-efficacy (Graham et al., 2013,

2014; Trivette et al., 2010).

Genuine empathy is an essential element of OPC, as trust in

the therapist is fundamental for caregivers to engage in dis-

cussions promoting viable solutions to performance problems

beyond emotional descriptions of performance barriers (Trivette

et al., 2010).

Reframing techniques assists therapists in guiding caregivers

to develop more enabling performance contexts. Reframing

offers alternative interpretations and promotes new ways and

techniques to support children’s performance. For instance,

suggesting that a child who often writes illegibly may have diffi-

culties with proper seating and maintaining his body position at

the desk leads caregivers to provide different support strategies

than when the child’s difficulties are framed as fine motor skill

issues (Rodger & Kennedy-Behr, 2017).

According to Rush and Shelden (2011), a coach supports

another person’s learning through developing collaborative

partnerships, supporting the person to achieve self-created

goals, and building the person’s existing competencies.

Therefore, in OPC, the therapist focuses on guiding caregiv-

ers’ reflections and choices of action while encouraging them

to make their own choices about specific changes. Directly

giving advice is avoided as this undermines caregivers’

self-efficacy.

The therapist encourages caregivers through distinguish-

ing their actions or new learning. When caregivers initiate

changes within the performance context, substantial effort is

often required before performance improvement transpires.

Therefore, encouragement is typically critical to caregivers’

persistence during the initial stages of OPC, while in the later

phases successful performance becomes an inherent feedback

loop to continue with implementing change (Dunn et al., 2012;

Graham et al., 2013, 2014).

Domain Three: Information Exchange

The third enabling domain refers to the process of mutual

information exchange between the caregiver and the thera-

pist and includes, but is not limited to, such topics as typi-

cal development, health conditions and impairments, task

analysis, teaching and learning strategies, and information

about community and other available resources. Typically,

the information is limited to what caregivers need to know to

plan and carry out actions leading to changes in occupational

performance.

The content of information relates directly to caregivers’

capacity to implement changes or strategies within the perfor-

mance context (Graham et al., 2013, 2014). This is the opportu-

nity for the therapist–coach to provide both general and specific

information to the parent related to therapeutic interventions,

development, resources, and strategies.

Information exchange relates to what the therapist has

observed and what the parent has shared. Parents and prac-

titioners bring their unique expertise to the information

exchange process. Parents are experts on their child, their

successes, and family resources. OTs are experts on occupa-

tion, child development, and evidence-based interventions for

children with special needs and their families. Therefore, this

exchange is reciprocally valued.

On some occasions, the information provided might be gen-

eral and reflect overall activities analysis (e.g., outlining specific

steps of the dressing activity), and at other times the informa-

tion might be very specific (e.g., how to create a social story

to support the child’s performance during transitions between

tasks and environments) (List Hilton, 2015).

Information about community and other resources—such as

appropriate community center parent–child classes, respite care

support, and eligibility for services—can also lead to practical

assistance that enables caregivers to maintain their role in sup-

porting their children’s occupational performance and sustain-

ing their own well-being (Graham et al., 2013).

CE-5

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE-5

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019 ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 

Table 2. Collaborative Performance Analysis for Goal: Completing Homework Independently, Legibly,and Within Allotted Time

Collaborative Performance Analysis Sample Conversation between Caregiver (C) and Occupational Therapist (OT)

1. Current Performance OT: Describe typical homework time.

C: Ben takes a long time digging in his backpack for homework and doesn’t always ﬁnd it.

C: Ben doesn’t sit at his desk, he stays on his stomach on the carpet in the family room.

C: Busy time, I’m making dinner, father still at work, 2-year-old sister and a dog are making noise, TV is

often on, toys on the ﬂoor.

C: Ben usually gets distracted, frequently gets up, plays with the dog and his sister, complains that he

is hungry, homework not completed before dinner, often illegible, cries and refuses to continue when

asked to re-write something, erases hard, often makes holes in paper.

C: I yell at him and I am fed up.

2. Preferred Performance OT: Describe what homework time will be like when there is no longer a problem.

C: Doesn’t waste time looking for his assignments and playing, stays focused and organized, completes

his homework before dinner, writes legibly, doesn’t complain.

C: I will not “loose it” again and will not be yelling.

3. Bridges and Barriers

(Option Exploration)

OT: Does Ben want to complete homework before dinnertime?

C: I think so; he doesn’t want to get in trouble with his dad. Ben said he feels like a disappointment to us.

OT: Does Ben know how to keep his papers organized? Does he have a designated homework folder?

Is his backpack clean and free of other unnecessary items? Do his desk and chair provide enough

support for him? Do they stay in his room or downstairs in the family room?

C: I am not sure, I’ll have to check.

OT: What would help you to stay calm during this time?

C: Maybe starting dinner earlier before picking Ben up from swimming.

4. Caregiver Needs (Further Option Explora-

tion, Action Planning)

OT: What do you think makes it hard for Ben to complete his homework on time?

C: He is just disorganized, doesn’t pay attention, lazy, ﬁnds excuses to get out of work, his handwriting

skills are poor.

OT: What will it be like for you to try strategies (seating, organization, adapted writing implement) we

discussed today during homework time this week?

C: Hmm, I’ll try it. Could you show me that seating and positioning again?

OT: Do you think this is doable for you this week? What would be more realistic?

OT: How conﬁdent are you that this plan will make a difference?

5. Carry Out Plan

(Implementation, *difﬁculty is expected)

OT: After you tried these strategies, do you still think that the planned action is likely to work if it could

be implemented with modiﬁcations?

C: Yes, but I ran into these difﬁculties …

OT: These are the valid reasons why the plan was difﬁcult to implement. Let us explore what would

make the plan easier to implement. What are your thoughts?

OT: Which of the following strategies would make your plan easier to implement? Which speciﬁc strate-

gy we discussed would you like to try this week?

6. Checking Performance (*highlights the

link between caregivers’ actions and

children’s more successful performance;

if no change is observed/reported, return

to option exploration stage)

OT: Let us review what happened this week during homework time Do you have a video for us to watch

and discuss?

C: Yes, it is on my phone.

OT: What was different in the sequence of events?

C: I started dinner early and only had to put it in the oven during homework time. I could entertain my

2-year-old while Ben was doing homework.

OT: What was different about the performance and performance context this week?

C: Ben was seated at his desk. We got him a new chair that ﬁts him well. His handwriting appeared neater.

OT: What would you make sure you do again next week?

C: Use a homework binder and continue emailing his teacher for speciﬁc homework clariﬁcations.

OT: What did you notice that helped, at least a small amount? What could you do more?

C: I am not sure; he still complained a lot about math, but maybe I should give a visual timer another chance

OT: What would you deﬁnitely avoid in the future?

C: Yelling at him, as it makes him feel defeated and I am unhappy.

7. Generalization (*promotes caregivers’ self-

competence by prompting autonomous

decision making, action and judgment)

OT: What other activities does Ben do that you expect this strategy will be useful for?

C: Changing his seating at the dinner table.

OT: Where else have you noticed yourself automatically using this technique?

C: I make sure to have time to myself everyday now and I become less irritable.

OT: When you think ahead and you imagine that everything is going well, what do you notice you and

Ben are doing? What would be the ﬁrst sign you would notice that would remind you to adjust the

situation to keep things going well? What would be the ﬁrst action you would take to get things

back on track for your family?

CE-6

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE Article, exam, and certificate

are also available ONLINE.

call toll-free 877-404-AOTA (2682).

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019

Case Example: Jane and Rochelle

Jane, the mother of 5-year-old twin girls, Rochelle and Joanne,

set a goal focused on improving Rochelle’s very limited diet.

Through the exchange of information process and collabora-

tive performance analysis, the OT and Jane hypothesized that

Rochelle’s refusal of new foods, which limited her food rep-

ertoire, was because of her perceived weirdness of new foods

rather than the sensory difficulties she had experienced in the

past and resolved as the result of extensive interventions and a

home program.

Jane’s preference was that Rochelle incorporate at least one

new food at various meals into her diet each week without

disruptive behaviors. A specific strategy of introducing one new

food for all daily meals despite Rochelle’s protests was proposed.

During the discussion of the proposed actions, the OT noticed

that Jane was hesitant about the plan. Further exploration of this

with Jane revealed a conflict between her motivation to keep

Rochelle calm and to allow her husband to have a pleasant fam-

ily meal after work, and her motivation to improve Rochelle’s

food repertoire.

The practitioner’s gentle acknowledgement and exploration

of this motivational conflict through the strategies outlined

in the second enabling domain (careful listening, reframing,

guiding, and encouraging) enabled Jane to identify adjustments

to her plan that resolved her reluctance to offer new food to

Rochelle. With the practitioner’s guidance, Jane decided that it

would be more realistic for her to initially present new food only

during lunch and a snack time.

Additionally, Jane incorporated a positive self-talk strategy

prior to lunch and the snack, which was developed with the

OT’s guidance and which gave her the confidence to persist until

Rochelle accepted the new foods and her negative behaviors

diminished.

CONCLUSION

OPC offers a valuable contribution to occupational therapy

practice. It incorporates all of the elements of best practice in

contemporary occupational therapy (e.g., family centered, occu-

pation based, enablement focused). Additionally, OPC focuses

on the interpersonal aspects of occupational therapy, the validity

of an orientation toward solutions, and the potential for these

approaches to enable performance through parent-implemented

change.

Occupational therapy practitioners are well positioned to

address effective caregiver coaching promoting occupational

performance of their children and themselves. Generalizing

and transferring knowledge and skills, as well as preventing

future occupational performance problems among children and

adolescents, could be achieved through implementing the OPC

process. Research efforts targeting the fidelity of OPC inter-

ventions and its role in enhancing participation and improving

quality of life and satisfaction for occupational therapy clients

would be a valuable contribution to the body of knowledge in

this area (King et al., 2017).

REFERENCES

American Occupational Therapy Association. (2014). Occupational therapy

practice framework: Domain and process (3rd ed.). American Journal of Occu-

pational Therapy, 68(Suppl.1), S1–S48. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2014.682006

Bagby, M. S., Dickie, V. A., & Baranek, G. T. (2012). How sensory experiences of

children with and without autism affect family occupations. American Journal

of Occupational Therapy, 66, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2012.000604

Baird, S., & Peterson, J. (1997). Seeking a comfortable fit between family-cen-

tered philosophy and infant–parent interaction in early intervention: Time

for a paradigm shift? Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 17, 139–164.

Bulkeley, K., Bundy, A., Roberts, J., & Einfeld, S. (2016). Family-centered

management of sensory challenges of children with autism: Single-case

experimental design. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 70,

7005220040p1–7005220040p8. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2016.017822

Dawson, D., McEwen, S., & Polatajko, H. (Eds.). (2017). Cognitive orientation

to daily occupational performance in occupational therapy: Using the CO-OP

approach to enable participation across the lifespan. Bethesda, MD: AOTA Press.

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-deter-

mination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109–134. https://

doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6

Dunn, W., Cox, J., Foster, L., Mische-Lawson, L., & Tanquary, J. (2012). Impact

of contextual intervention on child participation and parent competence

among children with autism spectrum disorders: A pretest-posttest repeated

measures design. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66, 520–528.

https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2012.004119

Foster, L., Dunn, W., & Lawson, L. M. (2013). Coaching mothers of children

with autism: A qualitative study for occupational therapy practice. Physical

and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 33, 253–263.

Graham, F., & Rodger, S. (2010). Occupational performance coaching: Enabling par-

ents’ and children’s occupational performance. In S. Rodger & A. Kennedy-Behr

(Eds.), Occupation-centered practice with children: A practical guide for occupational

therapists (pp. 203–226). Chichester, West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons.

Graham, F., Rodger, S., & Kennedy-Behr, A. (2017). Occupational performance

coaching: Enabling caregivers’ and children’s occupational performance. In S.

Rodger & A. Kennedy-Behr (Eds.), Occupation-centered practice with children:

A practical guide for occupational therapists (2nd ed., 194–2014). Chichester,

West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons.

Graham, F., Rodger, S., & Ziviani, J. (2009). Coaching parents to enable

children’s participation: An approach for working with parents and their

children. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 56, 16–23.

Graham, F., Rodger, S., & Ziviani, J. (2010). Enabling occupational performance

of children through coaching parents: Three case reports. Physical and Occu-

pational Therapy in Pediatrics, 30, 4–15.

Graham, F., Rodger, S., & Ziviani, J. (2013). Effectiveness of occupational

performance coaching in improving children’s and mothers’ self-competence.

American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.5014/

ajot.2013.004648

Graham, F., Rodger, S., & Ziviani, J. (2014). Mothers’ experiences of engaging in

occupational performance coaching. British Journal of Occupational Therapy,

77, 189–197.

Graham, F., Rodger, S., Ziviani, J., & Jones, V. (2015). Strategies identified as

effective by mothers during occupational performance coaching. Physical and

Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 36, 247–259.

Harrison, C., Romer, T., Simon, M., & Schulze, C. (2007). Factors influencing

mothers’ learning from paediatric therapists: A qualitative study. Physical and

Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 27, 77–95.

King, G., Williams, L., & Hahn Goldberg, S. (2017). Family oriented services in

pediatric rehabilitation: A scoping review and framework to promote parent

and family wellness. Child: Care, Health and Development, 43, 334–347.

Kiresuk, T., & Sherman, R. (1968). Goal Attainment Scaling: A general method

for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Communi-

ty Mental Health Journal, 4, 443–453.

Law, M., Cooper, B., Strong, B., Stewart, D., Rigby, P., & Letts, L. (1996). The

Person–Environment Occupation Model: A transactive approach to occupa-

tional performance. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 9–23.

CE-7

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE-7

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019 ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 

Law, M., Darrah, J., Pollock, N., King, G., Rosenbaum, P., Russell, D., … Watt, J.

(1998). Family-centered functional therapy for children with cerebral palsy:

An emerging practice model. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics,

18(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/J006v18n01_06

List Hilton, C. (2015). Interventions to promote social participation for children

with mental health and behavioral disorders. In J. Case-Smith & J. C. O’Brien

(Eds.), Occupational therapy for children and adolescents (7th ed., 321–345). St.

Louis, MO: Mosby.

Miller-Kuhaneck, H., & Watling, R. (2018). Parental or teacher education and

coaching to support function and participation of children and youth with

sensory processing and sensory integration challenges: A systematic review.

American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72, 7201190030p1–7201190030p11.

https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.029017

Rodger, S., & Kennedy-Behr, A. (2017). Occupation-centred practice with

children: A practical guide for occupational therapists (2

ed.). Hoboken,

NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Rush, D. D., & Shelden, M. L. (2011). The early childhood coaching handbook.

Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Seligman, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduc-

tion. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.

Trivette, C., Dunst, C., & Humby, D. (2010). Influences of family-systems inter-

vention practices on parent-child interactions and child development. Topics

in Early Childhood Special Education, 30(1), 3–19.

Trombly, C. (1993). Anticipating the future: Assessment of occupational

function. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47, 253–257. https://doi.

org/10.5014/ajot.47.3.253

Washington, K., & Schwartz, I. (1996). Maternal perceptions of the effects of

physical and occupational therapy services on caregiving competency. Physi-

cal and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 16, 33–54.

Final Exam

Article Code CEA1119

Occupational Performance Coaching as an

Ultimate Facilitator

To receive CE credit, exam must be completed by

November 30, 2021.

Learning Level: Intermediate to Advanced

Target Audience: Occupational Therapy Practitioners

Content Focus: Domain: Client Factors; OT Process: Occupational Therapy

Evaluation and Interventions

1. One of the major principles of occupational performance coach-

ing (OPC) is that:

A. Occupational therapy practitioners provide expert advice

the parents.

B. Practitioners perform therapeutic interventions targeting

the change in characteristics of the child.

C. Practitioners guide parents in developing strategies to

meet their family’s needs.

D. Practitioners address only the child’s needs and disregard

the family’s priorities.

2. OPC is based on the following theoretical and philosophical

underpinnings:

A. Enablement principles of health, occupation, and fami-

ly-centered practice

B. Parent education, task analysis, and client-centered care

C. Therapeutic use of self, active engagement in occupation,

and person-environment-occupation model

D. Enablement principles of self-determination and

self-advocacy

3. During the collaborative performance analysis, the OT strives to

perform all of the following except:

A. Determine changes and explore options in order for the

child to become successful with activity performance.

B. Determine what needs to change for the caregiver to

enable performance.

C. Provide a specific home program reflective of the current

client’s goals to implement on a daily basis.

D. Develop the caregiver’s skills to find solutions to their

child’s performance deficits.

How to Apply for

Continuing Education Credit

A. To get pricing information and to register to take the exam online for the

article Occupational Performance Coaching as an Ultimate Facilitator, go to

http://store.aota.org, or call toll-free 800-729-2682.

B. Once registered and payment received, you will receive instant email

confirmation.

C. Answer the questions to the final exam found on pages CE-7 & CE-8

y November 30, 2021.

D. On successful completion of the exam (a score of 75% or more), you will

immediately receive your printable certificate.

CE-8

Earn .1 AOTA CEU (one contact hour and 1.25 NBCOT PDU). See page CE-7 for details.

Continuing Education Article

CE Article, exam, and certificate

are also available ONLINE.

call toll-free 877-404-AOTA (2682).

ARTICLE CODE CEA1119 | NOVEMBER 2019

4. Research suggests that OT caregiver education includes all of

the following except:

A. It is led by an OT

B. It is typically provided in accordance with the pre-estab-

lished therapeutic program

C. It typically results in the parent independently translat-

ing knowledge to provide assistance to the child in the

particular episode of care

D. It typically is a collaborative process that enables caregiv-

ers to create their own solutions to meet the child and

family’s needs

5. The OPC process is implemented through _____ and guided by

the _____ enabling domains.

A. Active engagement in occupation; five

B. Collaborative discussions; three

C. Addressing underlying skill deficits; four

D. Performing task analysis; six

6. In OPC, the goals focus on:

A. Underlying body structures and functions

B. Underlying skill deficits

C. Occupational performance

D. Activity analysis

7. As per research, the full OPC process typically consists of how

many sessions, depending on the caregiver’s needs?

A. 8 to 10

B. 2 to 4

C. 10 to 12

D. 3 to 6

8. In OPC, the goal-setting process includes all of the following

except:

A. Collaboration with caregivers

B. Addressing caregivers’ priorities and concerns related

to the occupational performance of their children and

themselves

C. Fully reflecting the child’s objectives and points of view

D. Consistently revisiting and adjusting goals

9. Collaborative Performance Analysis is:

A. An activity analysis performed for each task

B. Included in Domain Two, which is titled Emotional

Support

C. Specific explor

ation of occupational performance based on

information exchanged between the caregiver and the OT

D. Performed via structured standardized interviews and

observations performed live in the outpatient clinic

10. Reframing techniques assist practitioners in:

A. Guiding caregivers to develop more enabling perfor-

mance contexts by offering alternative interpretations to

occupational performance difficulties

B. Providing direct interventions for the child

C. Implementing particular intervention activities at home

as specified in the educational handout provided to

caregivers

D. Interpreting occupational performance difficulties in

only one correct way

11. Research suggests that during the Information Exchange Pro-cess

within the OPC, the information exchange relates to:

A. Only what the therapist has observed during real-time

and video observations

B. The unique expertise of the occupational therapist on the

specific client’s needs and goals

C. The parent’s expertise on child development

D. What the therapist has observed and what the parent has

shared

12. One of the major goals of OPC process is to:

A. Promote caregivers’ generalization and transfer of knowl-

edge and skills to prevent future occupational perfor-

mance problems

B. Address and correct the client’s underlying performance

skill deficits

C. Promote goal achievement through adaptive strategies

provided to the client

D. Promote generalization and transfer of skills through

implementing highly effective intervention programs

Now that you have selected your answers, you are

only one step away from earning your CE credit.

Click here to earn your CE

Download
Save PDF to desktop

Email
Email completed PDF

Send for Signing
Email for others to sign

Print
Print document

NAME

CE Article November 2019

View Audit Log
Print With Audit Log
Duplicate Document

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank CE Article November 2019 Form

Related forms

Fillable CE Article November 2019

Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank CE Article November 2019 Form

Related forms

First 20 documents completely FREE!