Scholarlink

Background <p>Three Danish versions of the Clinical Assessments of Modes (CAM) have been adapted for practice: CAM–Client Time 1 (D-CAM-C1), CAM–Client Time 2 (D-CAM-C2) and CAM–Therapist (D-CAM-T), collectively referred to as D-CAMQs. Evidence on clinical utility is limited.</p> Aims/Objectives <p>To explore clinical utility of the D-CAMQs.</p> Material and Methods <p>Occupational therapists (OTs) and clients were recruited. Clients completed D-CAM-C1 before and D-CAM-C2 after therapy; OTs completed D-CAM-T after therapy. Surveys addressed appropriateness, accessibility, practicability and acceptability.</p> Results <p>Eleven OTs and 47 clients (23–97 years, mostly neurological conditions) participated. Clients rated all six therapeutic modes as relevant, with ‘Instructing’ most and ‘Advocating’ least important. Group patterns of perceived mode use were similar for clients and OTs. However, correlations between preferred and perceived use were moderate (<i>r</i><sub>s</sub> = 0.26–0.48), and client–therapist agreement was weak to trivial. Most clients found D-CAMQs appropriate and beneficial (≥57% to a great extent). OTs expressed mixed views, particularly regarding appropriateness and time investment. Both groups found instructions clear and acceptability high (&gt;80%).</p> Conclusion and Significance <p>D-CAMQs appear useful for supporting therapeutic dialogue in Danish practice. Client-therapist discrepancies and varying OT perceptions highlight the need for further research. Small sample size represents a limitation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Clinical utility of the Danish versions of the Clinical Assessment of Modes Questionnaires

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月1日

查看全文
  • Kristina Tomra Nielsen,
  • Marc Sampedro Pilegaard,
  • Anette Enemark Larsen,
  • Eva Ejlersen Wæhrens

摘要

Background

Three Danish versions of the Clinical Assessments of Modes (CAM) have been adapted for practice: CAM–Client Time 1 (D-CAM-C1), CAM–Client Time 2 (D-CAM-C2) and CAM–Therapist (D-CAM-T), collectively referred to as D-CAMQs. Evidence on clinical utility is limited.

Aims/Objectives

To explore clinical utility of the D-CAMQs.

Material and Methods

Occupational therapists (OTs) and clients were recruited. Clients completed D-CAM-C1 before and D-CAM-C2 after therapy; OTs completed D-CAM-T after therapy. Surveys addressed appropriateness, accessibility, practicability and acceptability.

Results

Eleven OTs and 47 clients (23–97 years, mostly neurological conditions) participated. Clients rated all six therapeutic modes as relevant, with ‘Instructing’ most and ‘Advocating’ least important. Group patterns of perceived mode use were similar for clients and OTs. However, correlations between preferred and perceived use were moderate (rs = 0.26–0.48), and client–therapist agreement was weak to trivial. Most clients found D-CAMQs appropriate and beneficial (≥57% to a great extent). OTs expressed mixed views, particularly regarding appropriateness and time investment. Both groups found instructions clear and acceptability high (>80%).

Conclusion and Significance

D-CAMQs appear useful for supporting therapeutic dialogue in Danish practice. Client-therapist discrepancies and varying OT perceptions highlight the need for further research. Small sample size represents a limitation.