ABSTRACT
Health professionals/clinicians interview people regularly as part of their role. However, a qualitative research interview differs considerably to a clinical interview. If clinicians approach qualitative research interviewing based on their expertise in clinical interviewing, it could cause insufficiencies in qualitative data generation. In this reflection article, we, a team of four experienced clinical occupational therapists with no previous experience in qualitative research interviewing, share our experiences while learning to become qualitative research interviewers before undertaking our first qualitative research project. We engaged in self-directed reading, formal training on qualitative interviewing, and practice interviews and used peer feedback and reflection to prepare ourselves to conduct qualitative interviews. We drew upon the work-role transitions theory to work through our adjustment to the new role. Although we set out to "switch hats" as the research topic itself was not clinical, interviewing people on health-related topics will mean bringing our clinical instincts into our research role, while still recognizing the difference between a clinical and research interview. This article can inform experienced clinicians/novice qualitative researchers as they develop this new skillset.
ABSTRACT
Background and aim Executive function (EF) impairment is common in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). EF strategies are considered effective in improving the therapeutic outcomes of children with ASD. This study primarily aimed to explore whether integrating EF strategies combined with regular occupational therapy intervention is more effective in improving daily life skills (DLS) and sensory integration/processing (SI/SP) skills than regular occupational therapy alone in children with ASD and secondarily aims to assess treatment outcomes on improving visual motor integration (VMI) skills. Methods A total of 17 participants (13 males, mean age 4.29 years, standard deviation 0.66) completed the study. Following the baseline assessments, the participants were randomly assigned to the treatment group (45-minute once-weekly individual occupational therapy plus EF strategies) or control group (45-minute once-weekly individual therapy sessions alone). All participants received one intervention per week for 14 weeks. All children were systematically evaluated using a pediatric functional independent measure (WeeFIM) and the Verbal Behavior Milestones Assessment and Placement Program (VB-MAPP) to assess DLS, the Short Sensory Profile 2 (SSP2) to assess SP/SI, and the Beery VMI test (Beery VMI) to assess VMI. Assessments were conducted at baseline, seven weeks, and 14 weeks of treatment. Results The analysis of the results between the treatment and control groups revealed that the treatment group had greater gains and significant differences in the mean values of both the WeeFIM and SSP2. In addition, notable distinctions were observed in the VB-MAPP transition subscale; although these differences did not reach statistical significance, they were clinically significant. Minimal differences were noted in the VMI between the two groups. Nevertheless, both groups showed statistically significant improvements across all outcome measures. Conclusions Our study provides preliminary evidence of the efficacy of EF strategies combined with regular occupational therapy for DLS, SP/SI, and VMI in children with ASD. The differences between the groups support further evaluation of the effectiveness of EF strategies for the next stage of a larger randomized clinical trial.
