School of Health Professions, Institute of Physiotherapy, Zurich University of Applied Sciences ZHAW, Winterthur, Switzerland.
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Paediatrics, Division of Developmental Neurology, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2020 May;62(5):569-574. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.14493. Epub 2020 Feb 17.
Currently, coaching is increasingly applied to foster the involvement of families with an infant or young child with special needs in early intervention and paediatric rehabilitation. Coaching practices are included in many forms of intervention and are regarded as essential to reach beneficial outcomes for the child and family. There are, however, many ambiguities that blur the concept of coaching and hamper its understanding and integration as an evidence-based approach in early intervention and paediatric rehabilitation: lack of differentiation between coaching and training of families, for example. Challenges to incorporate coaching into professional practice relate to adult learning processes and knowledge acquisition, and transformation of attitudes, beliefs, and treatment habits. In this paper, we review the barriers encountered and the possibilities available to promote successful implementation of coaching in early childhood interventions. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Literature defines coaching ambiguously, which hampers its implementation in early intervention. The term 'coaching' should be reserved for relationship-directed, family-centred intervention.
目前，教练模式越来越多地应用于促进有特殊需要的婴幼儿家庭参与早期干预和儿科康复。教练实践包含在许多干预形式中，被认为对儿童和家庭达到有益的结果至关重要。然而，有许多模糊之处混淆了教练的概念，并阻碍了它作为一种循证方法在早期干预和儿科康复中的理解和整合：例如，缺乏对家庭培训和教练的区分。将教练纳入专业实践的挑战涉及成人学习过程和知识获取，以及态度、信念和治疗习惯的转变。在本文中，我们回顾了在促进幼儿干预中成功实施教练模式时遇到的障碍和可用的可能性。本文的贡献：文献对教练的定义模糊不清，这阻碍了它在早期干预中的实施。“教练”一词应保留给以关系为导向、以家庭为中心的干预。
