대한감각통합치료학회지 (The Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration)

  • 제16권3호
  • /
  • Pages.23-33
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 1738-0405(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-115X(eISSN)
대한감각통합치료학회 (Korean Academy of Sensory Integration)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

국내 아동 작업치료사의 평가도구 사용 동향

Current Trend in Use of Occupational Therapy Assessment Tool by Pediatric Occupational Therapist

  • 이선희 (연세대학교 대학원 작업치료학과) ;
  • 홍초롱 (연세대학교 대학원 작업치료학과) ;
  • 박혜연 (연세대학교 보건과학대학 작업치료학과)
  • Lee, Sun-Hee (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Hong, Cho-Rong (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Park, Hae Yean (Dept. of Occupational Therapy, College of Health Science, Yonsei University)
  • 투고 : 2018.11.02
  • 심사 : 2018.12.17
  • 발행 : 2018.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적 : 본 연구는 국내 아동 작업치료사들이 사용하고 있는 평가도구를 영역별로 구체화하여, 평가도구의 사용 동향을 파악하고자 하였다. 연구방법 : 본 연구는 아동 작업치료사를 대상으로 평가도구 사용에 대한 설문을 실시하였다. 평가도구의 하위영역은 작업수행, 일상생활활동, 교육, 놀이, 감각-지각, 운동 및 실행, 인지, 사회적 상호작용 기술, 발달, 이학적 검사로 구성하였다. 설문에 응답한 105명의 자료를 대상으로 기술통계 및 빈도분석을 사용하여 분석하였다. 결과 : 본 연구 결과는 초기 평가 시 소요되는 시간은 30~60분(41.9%)이 가장 많았으며, 재평가 주기는 3~6개월(41.0%)로 가장 많이 실시하는 것으로 나타났다. 영역 별 평가도구를 살펴보면, 작업 수행은 Canadian Occupation Performance Measure(55.2%)을, 일상생활활동은 Wee Functional Independence Measure(57.1%)을, 교육은 School Function Assessment(2.5%)를, 놀이 평가도구는 Revised Knox Preschool Play Scale(28.6%)을, 감각-지각은 Developmental Test of Visual Perception(94.3%)을, 운동 및 실행 평가도구는 Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2(42.9%)를, 인지 평가도구는 Lowenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment(11.4%)를, 사회적 상호작용 기술은 Evaluation of Social Interaction(6.1%)을, 발달은 Denver Developmental Screening Test-II(92.4%)를, 이학적 검사는 임상관찰(89.5%)을 주로 사용하는 것으로 나타났다. 결론 : 본 연구를 통하여 국내 아동작업치료사들이 사용하고 있는 평가도구를 영역별로 구체적으로 파악할 수 있었으며, 이를 통해 추후 평가 교육 및 개발을 위한 기초적인 근거자료가 될 것으로 기대된다.

Objective : The purpose of this study is to investigate trend in use of occupational therapy assessment tools used by pediatric occupational therapist. Methods : Survey questionnaire developed for this study were used to for data collection. The questionnaires are divided into 10 area: occupational performance, activities of daily living, education, play, sensory-perceptual, motor and praxis, cognition, social interaction skills, development, and physical examination. Total 105 responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics analysis and frequency analysis. Results : For the general process of evaluation in pediatric occupational therapy, major response on the initial evaluation time was 30~60minutes (41.9%), and major response on the re-evaluation period was 3~6months (41.0%). The major assessment tool for each area Canadian Occupation Performance Measure (55.2%) for occupational performance assessments, Wee Functional Independence Measure (57.1%) for activities of daily living assessments, School Function Assessment (2.5%) for education assessments, Knox Preschool Play Scale (28.6%) for play assessments, Developmental Test of Visual Perception (94.3%) for sensory-perceptual assessments, Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (42.9%) for motor and praxis assessments, Evaluation of Social Interaction (6.1%) for social interaction skills assessments, Denver Developmental Screening Test (92.4%) for development assessments, Clinical Observation (89.5%) for physical examination assessments. Conclusion : The study identified the most assessment tools used for specific area by pediatric occupational therapists. The results can be used as a basic data to educate about pediatric occupational therapy evaluation, as well as to develop new assessment tools in pediatric setting in future.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. American Occupational Therapy Association. (2010). Standards of practice for occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64(Suppl.), 106-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2010.64S106
  2. Asher, I. (2014). Asher's occupational therapy assessment tools: An annotated index (4th ed.). Bethesda, MD: AOTA Press.
  3. Bak, A. R., Kim, H., Yoo, D. H., & Cha, T. H. (2017). Study to reliability and validity of short sensory profile2. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 25(2), 131-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.14519/jksot.2017.25.3.10
  4. Crowe, T. K. (1989). Pediatric assessments: A survey of their use by occupational therapists in northwestern school systems. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 9. 273-286. https://doi.org/10.1177/153944928900900502
  5. Case-Smith, J., & O'Brien, J. C. (2015). Occupational therapy for children and adolescents. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier,
  6. Cho, B. H., & Park, H. W. (2004). The standardization study of korean bayley scales of infant development (K-BSID-II): Analyses of korean infants' performance of K-BSID-II in terms of demographical variables. Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17(1), 191-206.
  7. Dunn, W. (1999). Sensory profile: User's manual. San Antonio, T.X: Psychological Corporation.
  8. Hong, K. H., Kim, D. Y., Kang, H. B., Park, T. Y., Yun, E. J., Lee, J. Y., et al. (2016). A preliminary study on motor ability of preschool aged children by using bruininks-oseretsky test of motor proficiency-2 (BOT-2) short form. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 14(1), 31-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.18064/JKASI.2016.14.1.031
  9. Hong, S. Y., Chang, M. Y., & Kim, K, M. (2013). Analysis of participation of students with intellectual disabilities in a school environment using the PEO model. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 21(1), 95-105.
  10. Itzkovich, M., Elazar, B., & Averbuch, S. (1993), Lowenstein occupational therapy cognitive assessment manual. New Jersey: Maddak Inc.
  11. Jo, E. M., Jeong, Y. J., Choi, Y. M., & Yoo, E. Y. (2015). Current trends of occupational therapy assessment tool by Korean pediatric occupational therapist. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy for Child and School, 6, 53-64.
  12. Ji, S. Y., Kim, M. S., Keum, H. J., & Kim, S. H. (2009). Developmental standard of short sensory profile for korean children of school age (7 to 9 years old). Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 7(1), 27-36.
  13. Kim, J. H. (2011). Application of occupational therapy intervention process model : A case of child with sensory integration dysfunction. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 9(2), 1-13.
  14. Kim, M. H., Namgung, E. Y., Bu, K. H., Sim, J. H., & Lee, E. S. (2008). The performance of the clinical observations of motor and postural skills (COMPS) in school-aged normal children. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 1(1), 17-23.
  15. Kim, S. Y., & Min, Y. S. (2016). Literature review of korean occupational therapy research for children and youth regarding the international classification of functioning: Focusing on the korean society of occupational therapy. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 24(4), 161-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.14519/jksot.2016.24.4.12
  16. Kim, S. Y., Yoo, E. Y., Jung, M. Y., Park, S. Y., Lee, J, S., & Lee, J. Y. (2013). Development of activity participation assessment for school age children. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 21(2), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.14519/jksot.2013.21.4.02
  17. Lee, S. H., Park, H. Y. (2017). Occupational therapy intervention for improving play of children: A systematic review. Journal of Korean Academy of Sensory Integration, 15(2), 93-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.18064/jksot.2017.15.2.093
  18. Lim, K. M., Yoo, E. Y., Jung, M. Y., Lee, J, S., Kim, J. R., & Park, H. Y. (2018). Development of the evaluation tool of school-aged children's and writing. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 26(1), 103-118. http://dx. doi.org/10.14519/jksot.2018.26.1.08
  19. Lim, Y. J., Park, K. Y., & Yoo, E. Y. (2007). Pilot study to establish content validity of a korean-translated version of a sensory profile. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 15(2), 25-42.
  20. Law, M., Baum, C., & Dunn, W. (2016). Measuring occupational performance: Supporting best practice in occupational therapy. Thorofare, NJ: Slack.
  21. Mulligan SE. (2003). Occupational therapy evaluation for children: A pocket guide. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  22. Neistadt, M., & Crepeau, E. B. (1998). Glossary. In M.E. Neistadt & E.B. Crepeau (Eds.), Willard & Sparkman's occupational therapy (9th ed., pp. 90-100). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  23. Park, K. Y., Yoo, E. Y., Jung, M. Y., Park, S. Y., Lee, J. S., & Park, S. Y. (2011). Validation of the sensory profile for korean children With pervasive developmental disorder. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 19(3), 1-12.
  24. Park, S. Y., & Yoo, E. Y. (2002). The use of occupational therapy assessment tool by Korean occupational therapist. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 10(2), 99-108.
  25. Rodger, S. (1994). A survey of assessment used by paediatric occupational therapists. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal. 41, 137-142. http://dx.doi/10.5762/KAIS.2012.13.11.5229
  26. Shin, H. S., Han, K. J., Oh, K. S., Oh, J. J., & Ha, M. N. (2002). Korean denver developmental screening test II. Seoul: Hyunmunsa.
  27. Shin, Y. N., Park, S. H., Lee, J. Y., & Park, J. H. (2014). Validity and reliability of the korean version of the school function assessment. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 22(4), 27-37. http://dx.doi/10.14519/jksot.2014.22.4.03
  28. Song, C. S. (2012). Current trends and future-oriented view of clinical measurement used by neurological occupational therapist. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 13(11), 5229-5237. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2012.13.11.5229
  29. Yoo, E. Y,, Jung, M. Y., Park, S. Y., & Choi, E. H. (2006). Current trends of occupational therapy assessment tool by Korean occupational therapist. Journal of Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, 14(3), 27-37.