I've been a bit absent from my usual web life for the past couple of weeks. Sadly my beautiful Mum has been diagnosed with breast cancer. She's going through some surgery at the moment and hoping to start chemo in the next few weeks. Being on patient and family side of the healthcare equation for a change is not really where we wanted to be but I suppose its just a case on putting one foot in front of the other for now.....
Anyway life plods on and I have some new and exciting things happening.....
I'm really looking forward to doing a session on the MSc in Assistive Technology course at Coventry university in a couple of weeks. I'm talking to the students about assessment in my area of practice and what I'm hoping they will get out of it is the importance of all the contextual factors beyond the client themselves. By that I mean the ability of the persons environment (social and physical) to support their needs, and the influence of cultural aspects. Anyway this is a very brief post and I will write more after the session and maybe post the powerpoint.
Last week I was down at UK OT HQ aka COT/BAOT offices in London. I was recently appointed to one of the professional practice seats on the Membership and External Affairs board. I've been a member of BAOT for 12 years but never really taken an active role. Following the Disability Forum networking day I attended last year I really felt motivated to get involved, so after a gentle (and much appreciated!) shove from a OT colleague I applied for the role.
I had a really interesting day learning more about the board and the work of the OTN, BJOT and the website progress. It was good to be able to comment on the excellent projects underway. I was excited to be able to offer some opinions on how the organisation could make the most of media such as blogs, twitter and facebook to promote OT and membership. I was really pleased that people were very positive about my intention to use these channels to relate my experience as a new board member. As you might have guessed I think it will be so important to BAOT to use these tools to help current and potential OTs feel connected to their professional colleagues and their professional organisation.
Are there any BAOT members out there reading the blog? Leave a comment or tweet me to let me know your thoughts about how web2.0 could help you connect.
Showing posts with label assistive technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label assistive technology. Show all posts
Wednesday, 3 June 2009
Thursday, 5 February 2009
High expectations of EAT
I was having an interesting chat with a visiting SPR today about the high expectation of EAT he had found when visiting patients in our service. We discussed the impact of the constant media stream of technological advances which he termed "Bill Gates Syndrome" so that when we visit a person they often expect us to be able to provide star trek level controls of their home and beyond.
The reality of course is that EAT is often well behind mainstream technology. Costs incurred for necessary hoops like MHRA regs and a comparably small market make for often lower tech solutions that service users envisage.
A common misconception is always that throwing lots of technology in to the mix will in some way enhance a patients underlying skills and abilities. I always try to explain that we can use the tech factor to support and enhance but if a person doesn't have the often critical cognitive abilities and motivation we are often limited. Starting an assessment by talking about expectations cab be an effective way to get an idea of a starting point to negotiate.
As an Occupational Therapist I feel I have special skills to be able to breakdown the skills needed to use EAT and I hope I can then convey these in a sensitive and meaningful way to my patients. It might seem contradictory to underplay the role of technology when working in an EAT service but it serves to remind us that the focus should be on skills of the individual and the technology as a means to harness those abilities.
The reality of course is that EAT is often well behind mainstream technology. Costs incurred for necessary hoops like MHRA regs and a comparably small market make for often lower tech solutions that service users envisage.
A common misconception is always that throwing lots of technology in to the mix will in some way enhance a patients underlying skills and abilities. I always try to explain that we can use the tech factor to support and enhance but if a person doesn't have the often critical cognitive abilities and motivation we are often limited. Starting an assessment by talking about expectations cab be an effective way to get an idea of a starting point to negotiate.
As an Occupational Therapist I feel I have special skills to be able to breakdown the skills needed to use EAT and I hope I can then convey these in a sensitive and meaningful way to my patients. It might seem contradictory to underplay the role of technology when working in an EAT service but it serves to remind us that the focus should be on skills of the individual and the technology as a means to harness those abilities.
Tuesday, 9 December 2008
RAatE 2008
RAatE - Recent Advances in Assitive Tecchnology and Engineering annual conference (see previous post "Conferences, Conferences, Conferences!") held at the Health Desgin and Technology Institute at Coventry University - Very brief post to link to the paper I presented at this event.
Monday, 8 December 2008
Assistive technology as a psychological marker of change
Whilst teaching on a recent course I think I surprised the attendees by talking about the psychosocial impact of electronic assistive technology. It always interests me to see how people often get so into the tech factor they struggle to reconnect to the holistic implications of a high tech medium.
Anyway and interesting discussion ensued about how we can often have the false impression that providing a patient with a bit of kit will be well received as its offers a "solution" to a problem. Sadly however the issue of a device can also be a clear a visible marker of an ability lost or never to be gained and may therefore be received with a distinct feeling of sadness, even anger.
With this in mind I talked with the group about making referrals and provision at appropriate stages not just of functional ability, but also of psychological readiness. The importance of choosing a bit of kit or access method which allows (for those with progressive conditions) for a degree of deterioration is not just pragmatic for cost/resource reasons but also to mask those changes where possible.
When the patient has a deteriorating condition there is a clear argument for demonstrating/providing devices before someone actually needs them. This could be justified to allow the patient some mental preparation for what is too come, to allow a period of learning whilst the patient doesn't solely rely on a device and so on. This approach however can also be detrimental - the patient may not wish to engage with, or contemplate a difficult future, and there may be little motivation to use said "kit" when other more "normal" ways of performing a task still be viable In those situations the contrasting approach may be more appropriate, patients may be more willing to engage with the device when it represents a renewal of ability lost.
The whole notion of the significance and timing of the introduction of AT interests me greatly. It relates so well to the occupational therapy approach of looking holistically at a patients needs and reminds us that, exciting though technology can be, it is only a means to a functinonal end.
Anyway and interesting discussion ensued about how we can often have the false impression that providing a patient with a bit of kit will be well received as its offers a "solution" to a problem. Sadly however the issue of a device can also be a clear a visible marker of an ability lost or never to be gained and may therefore be received with a distinct feeling of sadness, even anger.
With this in mind I talked with the group about making referrals and provision at appropriate stages not just of functional ability, but also of psychological readiness. The importance of choosing a bit of kit or access method which allows (for those with progressive conditions) for a degree of deterioration is not just pragmatic for cost/resource reasons but also to mask those changes where possible.
When the patient has a deteriorating condition there is a clear argument for demonstrating/providing devices before someone actually needs them. This could be justified to allow the patient some mental preparation for what is too come, to allow a period of learning whilst the patient doesn't solely rely on a device and so on. This approach however can also be detrimental - the patient may not wish to engage with, or contemplate a difficult future, and there may be little motivation to use said "kit" when other more "normal" ways of performing a task still be viable In those situations the contrasting approach may be more appropriate, patients may be more willing to engage with the device when it represents a renewal of ability lost.
The whole notion of the significance and timing of the introduction of AT interests me greatly. It relates so well to the occupational therapy approach of looking holistically at a patients needs and reminds us that, exciting though technology can be, it is only a means to a functinonal end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
