Occupational therapy with people with depression: Using nominal group technique to collate clinician opinion

Aims. This aim of this study was to obtain a consensus from clinicians regarding occupational therapy for people with depression, for the assessments and practices they use that are not currently supported by research evidence directly related to functional performance. The study also aimed to discover how many of these assessments and practices were currently supported by research evidence. Methods. Following a previously reported systematic review of assessments and practices used in occupational therapy for people with depression, a modified nominal group technique was used to discover which assessments and practices occupational therapists currently utilize. Three online surveys gathered initial data on therapeutic options (survey 1), which were then ranked (survey 2) and re-ranked (survey 3) to gain the final consensus. Twelve therapists completed the first survey, whilst 10 clinicians completed both the second and third surveys. Major findings. Only 30% of the assessments and practices identified by the clinicians were supported by research evidence. A consensus was obtained on a total of 35 other assessments and interventions. These included both occupational-therapy-specific and generic assessments and interventions. Principle conclusion. Very few of the assessments and interventions identified were supported by research evidence directly related to functional performance. While a large number of options were generated, the majority of these were not occupational therapy specific.