Biomechanical Intervention Model in Occupational Theapy - Lab Report Example

Biomechanical interention model In OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY al Affiliation) Introduction Occupational therapy plays a major role in the treatment besides the assessment of psychiatric and physical conditions through the use of activities which aid in the prevention of disability while promoting independent functions in diverse facets of life (Spaulding 1989). The therapy achieves it goals in various patients by supporting health in addition to engagement in occupation which greatly aids in participation in life. Occupational therapy uses different strategies that directs the intervention process including establish/restore, maintain, create/promote, modify and prevent disability (Bell-Krotoski & Fess 1995). Occupational therapy can be broadly defined as the exploitation of treatments with the aim of developing, recovering, and or maintaining the day to day living and working conditions and skills of those with mental, physical and or developmental conditions. Occupational therapy is a practice which focuses on the client, in other words, it is client centered and places major stress on the advancement on the goals of the particular client under therapy (Matheson et al 1985). In order to boost involvement of the client in and performance of daily bustle, it is paramount that the occupational therapy interventions focus on the adaptation of the environment, modification of task, educating the client and teaching the skills (Hall 1999). Occupational therapy is employed in clients of various ages and conditions to aid them in overcoming the effects associated with disability as a result of psychological or physical sickness, accident or ageing ( Bowker 1993). Occupational therapy is aimed at involving the physical aspects of a patient’s body in the process of treatment. OT is client specific and its relevance will vary in its mode of application and in results from patient to patient. As such, modes of delivery of OT seek to indulge only, those practices which the patient’s body is likely to respond positively to. The basis of biomechanical intervention models in occupational therapy are kinetics, kinematics and the different forms of motion for different occupations; kinetics being the manner in which forces produce motion in the body and kinematics being the study of motion of body parts in time. For this reason this model is commonly referred to as the kinesiological model (Barr & Bear-Lehman 2001) Kinesiological model The biomedical intervention model is concerned with establishing the etiology of a disease, the prognosis and the syndromes of the disease before concluding Occupational therapy to be the correct diagnostic measure (Birge James 2003). It is vital to interpret the signs and symptoms of a disease and understand its origin as well as the cause the disease is bound to take. This is bearing in mind the fact that occupational therapy, contrary to former findings, is not a treatment measure suitable for every form of diagnosed condition. This is due to its inclination on the physical aspect of the body (Hirabayashi & Iwasaki 1995). This mode of therapy tends to restore balance in bodily imbalances that are known to cause pain and other associate illnesses. A muscle test is done on the patient in order to provide the needed biofeedback. The body acquires and accumulates the imbalances in specific order thus a specific order is used to restore the balance much faster. The order in which to restore the imbalances is usually identified and assessed through muscle testing. Tackling the priority imbalance aids in getting rid of other related imbalances (Cherng, Chen & Su 2001). An occupational therapist can devise a plan based on the biofeedback achieved from the muscle test. Advices and suggestion to restore the imbalance such as lifestyle changes, relaxation techniques and nutritional changes can then be deduced from the plan (Iarocci & McDonald 2006). Theoretical framework The physical aspect in this model is due to the fact that a lot of importance is attached to the concept of the motor aspect of the human body being largely dependent on physical mobility and strength. The muscular orientation of the human body makes kinematics possible. There is also the concept of attaching the concept of improvement of the health status of the human body to continued movement and activity involving the muscular structure of the body (McIntosh et al 1999). This makes occupational therapy a recommendation for the improvement of patients’ health. It is also possible to grade the amount of activity the patient will involve in, with a view of reaching set goals. This is bearing in mind that every patient’s condition is specific to the particular patient and as such, the dosage of activity recommended will be specific (Mangeot et al 2001) Three main approaches are considered in the kinesiological model. The graded activities approach is incorporated in the treatment program with the view of involving the patient in exercising specific muscles which the therapists finds vital to exercise. These activities are not activities the patient would involve in normal circumstances. They are activities brought on board deliberately by the therapist (Schaaf & Mulrooney 1989) This is the total contrary to activities of daily living approach. In this case, the therapist will recommend to the patient that he/ she gets involved in normal personal and domestic activities. It involves the psychological aspect of encouraging the patient to try involving themselves in domestic chores. Praise is a common feature of this aspect and it encourages the patient to keep trying. As such, the more the patient gets involved in physical activity, the more inclined they are on the path of total recovery. The other approach taken is that of a compensatory approach. It involves the introduction of aids whereby a patient is limited in ability to perform therapeutic physical activity (Edwards et al 2003). Strengths of the model The kinesiological model is aimed at improving muscular and cardio-respiratory endurance. This is an important aspect of life prolongation and maintenance of a steady recovery and health levels. Work tolerance is also bound to improve. Another aim is that of improving the number and the size of muscular fibres and hence, muscular strength (Lane 2002). This is alongside improving the range of motion of the patients’ joints and hence, the patients’ stamina. The physical exercises should be monitored keenly, however. This is for the purpose of preventing deformity which may arise from uncontrolled exercise. Apart from this, proper grading of exercise activities will ensure maintained capacity for movement even with exercise (Hanna & Rodger 2002). This model is considerably useful for a vast category of patients. Clients who experience difficulty in stable and sustained movement benefit from this model. This is because the model is aimed at improving their muscular stability, enabling them better movement abilities. The fact that the model improves the range of joint motion allows that a patient with a fracture prevents occurrences of stiffness or at least minimizes it by engaging in controlled physical exercise. This also allows for quicker recovery (Miller et al 1999). Cardio-respiratory diseases are common to people who engage less in physical activity, relative to their more physically active counterparts. As much, cardio-pulmonary diseases have been known to be averted and treated by involving the patient in exercise on a regular basis. This, apart from improving the health of the patient, allows to increased stamina in the patient as well as overall body strength. It also helps improve the client’s immunity to further health complications related to the cardio vascular system of the body (Parham & Primeau 1997). Muscle strength and joint movement improvement are some of the vital components of treating rheumatoid arthritis that should be considered greatly. As such, the biomechanical model becomes an important feature of the treatment program for the disease. Provision of othoses as well as an inclusion of home exercise program to the treatment procedure allows for the wholesome treatment of the disease (Lin & Reifel 1999) Movement in a graded manner is a vital component in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. It is vital that the client undergoes exercises that will enable increased strength and stamina as well as prolonged endurance. As such, the kinesiological model becomes a vital inclusion in the treatment measures for a multiple sclerosis client. Apart from multiple sclerosis and arthritis, the model can also aid in the treatment of hand injuries. This is alongside the treatment of amputations and nerve injuries. Quicker recoveries in such cases have been reported when one of the modes of treatments incorporated in this model of occupational therapy is the biomechanical model (Iwama, Thomson & Macdonald 2009). Weakness of the model The biomechanical model however, is limited in its effectiveness as a means of treatment. Foremost, the model does not treat pain. Means of reducing pain should be a complementary therapeutic measure alongside the kinesiological model. The incorporation of psychological therapy alongside this model of occupational therapy is also vital (Strong et al 1999). It is noteworthy however, that the psychological aspect can only be added to the treatment program by a deliberation by the patient’s therapist. This is because the biomechanical model by itself does not take in to account the psychological or emotional aspects of patient’s rehabilitation. In conditions when the psychological aspect of treatment is ignored, the treatment program is likely to be partially successful (Law et al 1996). Although the model is vital in treating ailments related to the cardio-respiratory structure of the body, it does not treat people with impairment of the nervous system. This disadvantages it relative to other models of treatment. This is because the nervous system serves as the core system of all other systems of the body (Kielhofner 2008). The fact that the physical exercises chosen are client specific and dependent on a large number of factors means that the client has a limited array of activities to choose from apart from the ones recommended by their therapist. There may arise issues of the patient having to participate in exercise they do not find comfortable, as is the case in the graded activities approach. Additionally, there is a limitation as regards time; this is because activities take time to set up. There therefore, is a limitation on the range of exercise activities that can be carried out especially when treatment time is limited (Haglund & Kjellberg 1999). The nature of the biomechanical model more often than not renders the patient passive may become passive in treatment. This is because the main focus is drawn away from the patient and recovery and shifted to the exercise activities. This has an impact on how the patient will choose to view the treatment procedure they are undertaking. In most cases, if the activity is not one that the patient enjoys participating in, they may lose interest in the treatment program, to their disadvantage (Kielhofner, Burke & Igi 1980). Further, there are other circumstances in which this form of therapy would not apply at all. This is because of its nature of manipulating the physical aspect of the human body towards therapy. Mental health illnesses for instance, like in the case of the nervous system disorders cannot be treated by the manipulation of the body’s mechanical abilities. This hence renders the kinesiology module of occupational therapy inefficient in the quest of cure (Krame et al 2009). There are however, some models of occupational therapy that are of relevant and quantifiable importance towards therapy. For instance, using the imaginative parameters of the mind can aid in solving mental complications. The one complication in such a scenario however, would come in when the creativity has to translate in the application of the physical components of the body (Kielhofner 1980) The biomechanical model can also not apply for clients who have a damaged or deteriorating central nervous system. This is because of the emphasis on the promotion of physical mobility and manipulating the ability towards mobility towards resolving diagnosed body dysfunctions. The nervous system is vital towards movement which means that its dysfunction will affect ability to move. Deteriorated muscle tones and hence affected movement abilities resultant of a dysfunctional central nervous system renders the application of the kinesiology model ineffective and inappropriate in treatment (Cherng et al 1999). The fact that this model seeks to understand the body as a machine means that pain eradication measures are not considered in the program towards treatment. On the contrary, the model is aimed at improving the body’s suppleness, its strength and stamina as well as the client’s stability. This means that the patient is likely to receive more exposure to pain elements in the process of exercise activities (Parham 1996). Application in treatment The kinesiological model can be applied in occupational therapy through the various approaches it takes in treating the various patients. Kinesiology has a wide range of health benefits and is applied in a myriad of health and well—being issues. Occupational therapists can utilize this model to aid in the treatment of patients such as overcoming trauma, eliminating physical, emotional and mental stress, boosting sports performances, identification of nutritional deficiency, in overcoming phobias and fears, and aid in healing of injuries associated with muscles (Kielhofner & Burke 1980). Kinesiology can be applied in patients who have been involved in accidents in order to aid in the healing process. A number of patients have confessed to kinesiology having played a major role in their healing process after an accident. A patient that had broken both her legs in an accident back in 1988 confessed to getting better after embracing kinesiology as a mode of therapy. This was after various failed attempts to knit her left leg using various homeopathic remedies like Symphytum and Traumeel (Haglund & Henriksson 2003). Occupational therapist can also utilize kinesiological model of occupational therapy in patients with post surgery pains. A kinesiology balance can go a long way in healing pains associated with surgery. Positive results have been experienced in a number of patients who experienced post surgery pains and embraced kinesiology as a therapeutic model. A patient who had undergone surgery to remove her fallopian tube confessed to having experienced reduced pains after kinesiology treatment. The pain associated with this kind of surgery is quite intense and with a number of failed attempts to relieve it the patient tuned to kinesiology from which she received positive results of pain relief (Stucki, et al 2002). Another application that occupational therapists can embrace is the use of kinesiology in improving gymnastic performance. Different approaches can be used to aid patients with anxiety and panic attacks get healed through this model. Learning difficulties in kids and young adults can also be improved through the use of this model via the various and relevant approaches of this therapy (Matsutsuyu 1971). Kinesiology has proved to be an effective method in the diagnosis and treatment of performance pain as a result of movement impairment syndromes. Occupational therapists can utilize the kinesiopathologic model in treating this kind of pain. The model is capable of treating pain as a result of structural, neurological, biomechanical and support. The model works by identifying the posture of the patient or the repeated movements after which the movement impairments are identified as well as their syndromes. Functional limitations and clinical finding are then recorded for treatment (Dahl 2002). This model require occupational therapist to take kin note of the process of the pain from the movement impairment stage, microtrrauma, macrotrauma to identifiable tissue changes in order to deliver a more appropriate treatment to the patient. Kinesiology can be applied in the treatment of pains associated with performance by identifying the possible muscles which tend to inhibition such as Erector spinae, gluteus maximus, and lower stabilizers of the scapulae. Muscles which tend to tighteness such as thoracolumbar erector spinae, upper trapezius and levator scapulae in addition to cervical erector spinae are identified (Iwama 2006). Different and specific exercises targeting these areas and muscles are then identified and performed on the patient in a routine basis. In addition to the mentioned possible application of kinesiological model are applications in respiratory difficulties aid, migraines, back and neck pains including sciati and anger management (Tufano 2008). References 1. Matsutsuyu, J., 1971. Occupational behavior-A perspective on work and play. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 25, 291-293. 2. Heard, C., 1977. Occupational role acquisition: A perspective on the chronically disabled. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 31(4), 243-247. 3. Tufano, R., 2008. Applied theories in occupational therapy: a practical approach. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK. (Chapter 6) 4. Dahl, T. H., 2002. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: An introduction and discussion of its potential impact on rehabilitation services and research. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 34, 201-204. 5. Haglund, L., & Henriksson, C., 2003. Concepts in occupational therapy in relation to the ICF. Occupational Therapy International, 10, 253-268. 6. Stucki, G., Cieza, A., Ewert, T., Kostanjsek, N., Chatterji, S., & Ustun, T. B., 2002. Application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in clinical practice. Disability and Rehabilitation, 24, 281-282. 7. Kielhofner, G., & Burke, J.,1980. A model of human occupation, Part 1: Conceptual framework and content. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 34, 572-581. 8. Kielhofner, G., 1980. A model of human occupation, Part 2: Ontogenesis from the perspective of temporal adaptation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 34, 657-663. 9. Kielhofner, G., 1980. A model of human occupation, Part 3: Benign and vicious cycles. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 34, 731-737. 10. Kielhofner, G., Burke, J., & Igi, C. H., 1980. A model of human occupation, Part 4: Assessment and intervention. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 34, 777-788. 11. Kramer, J., Kielhofner, G., Lee, S. W., & Ashpole, E., 2009. Utility of the Model of Human Occupation screening tool for detecting client change. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 25, 181-191. 12. Haglund, L., & Kjellberg, A., 1999. A critical analysis of the Model of Human Occupation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy - Revue Canadienne d Ergotherapie, 66, 102-108. 13. Kielhofner, G., 2008. A model of human occupation: Theory and application, 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. 14. Law, M., Cooper, B., Strong, S., Stewart, D., Rigby, P., & Letts, L., 1996. The person-environment-occupation model: A transactive approach to occupational performance. Candian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 9-23. 15. Strong, S., Rigby, P., Stewarts, D., Law, M., & Cooper, B., 1999. Application of the Person-Environment-Occupation Model: A practical tool. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66, 122-133. 16. Iwama, M. K., Thomson, N. A., & Macdonald, R., 2009. The Kawa model: The power of culturally responsive occupational therapy. Disability & Rehabilitation, 31, 1125-35. 17. Iwama, M. K., 2006. The Kawa model: culturally relevant occupational therapy. New York: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier. 18. Lin, S., & Reifel, S.,1999. Context and meaning in Taiwanese kindergarten play. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Play and culture studies, Vol, 2. (pp. 151-176). Stamford, CT: Ablext Pbulishing Corp. 19. Parham, L. D., & Primeau, L. A., 1997. Play and Occupational Therapy. In L.D. Parham, & L. S. Fazio (Eds), Play in occupational therapy for children (pp. 2-21). St. Louis: Mosby. 20. Parham, L.D., 1996. Perspectives on play. In R. Zemke & F. Clark (Eds.), Occupational science (pp. 71-80). Philadelphia: F.A. Davis. 21. Edwards, M. A., Millard, P., Praskac, L. A., & Wisniewski, P. A., 2003.Occupational therapy and early intervention: a family-centred approach. Occupational Therapy International, 10, 239-52. 22. Hanna, K. & Rodger, S., 2002. Towards family-centred practice in paediatric occupational therapy: A review of the literature on parent–therapist collaboration. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 49, 14-24. 23. Schaaf, R. C., & Mulrooney, L. L., 1989.Occupational therapy in early intervention: A family-centered approach. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 43, 745-54. 24. Lane, S. J., 2002. Sensory modulation. In A. C. Bundy, S. J. Lane & E. A. Murray (Eds.), Sensory integration: theory and practice, 2nd ed. (pp. 101-123). F.A. Davis Company, Philadelphia, 25. Mangeot, S. D., Miller, L. J., McIntosh, D. N., McGrath-Clarke, J., Simon, J., Hagerman, R. J., et al., 2001. Sensory modulation dysfunction in children with attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 43, 399-406. 26. McIntosh, D. N., Miller, L. J., Shyu, V., & Hagerman, R. J.,1999. Sensory-modulation disruption, electrodermal responses, and functional behaviors. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 41, 608-615. 27. Miller, L. J., McIntosh, D. N., McGrath, J., Shyu, V., Lampe, M., Taylor, A. K., et al., 1999. Electrodermal responses to sensory stimuli in individuals with fragile X syndrome: a preliminary report. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 83, 268-279. 28. Iarocci, G., & McDonald, J., 2006. Sensory integration and the perceptual experience of persons with Autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36, 77-89. 29. Cherng, R. J., Chen, J. J., & Su, F. C., 2001. Vestibular system in performance of standing balance of children and young adults under altered sensory conditions. Perceptual Motor Skills, 92, 1167-1179. 30. Cherng, R. J., Su, F. C., Chen, J. J., & Kuan, T. S.,1999. Performance of static standing balance in children with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy under altered sensory environments. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 78, 336-343. 31. Hirabayashi, S., & Iwasaki, Y., 1995. Developmental perspective of sensory organization on postural control. Brain and Development, 17, 111-113. 32. Birge James A., 2003. Biomechanical frame of reference. In Crepeau, E. B., Cohn, E. S., & Schell, B. A. (Eds.). Willard and Spackman’s occupational therapy (10th ed). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, p. 240-242. 33. Barr A.E. & Bear-Lehman J., 2001. Biomechanics of the wrist and hand. In M. Nordin, V. H. Frankel (Eds.), Basic biomechanics of the musculoskeletal system (3rd ed). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, p.358-387. 34. Snijders C.J., 2001. Engineering approaches to standing, sitting and lying. In M. Nordin, V. H. Frankel (Eds.), Basic biomechanics of the musculoskeletal system (3rd ed). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, p.420-437. 35. P. Bowker., 1993. Biomechanical basis of orthotic management. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston. 36. Hall S., 1991. Basic Biomechanics. Mosby-Year Book, St. Louis. 37. Bell-Krotoski J.A. & Fess E.E., 1995. Biomechanics: the forces of change and the basis for all that we do. J Hand Ther, 8(2): 63-67. 38. Spaulding S.J., 1989. The biomechanics of prehension. Am J Occup Ther, 43(5): 302-307. 39. Matheson L.N., Ogden L.D., Violette K., Schultz K., 1985. Working hardening: occupational therapy in industrial rehabilitation. Am J Occup Ther, 39(5): 314-321. 40. Chiu H.Y., Su F.C., & Wang, S.T., 1998. The Maximal Area of Fingertip Motion: Normal Value in Young Adult, J Hand Surg, Vol 23(B): 53-56. 41. Chiu, H.Y., Su, F.C., Wang, S.T., Hsu H.Y., 1998.The Motion Analysis System and the Goniometry of the Finger Joints, J Hand Surg, Vol 23B: 788-791. Read More