Can J Occup Ther. 2024 Sep;91(3):256-271. doi: 10.1177/00084174241233519. Epub 2024 Mar 4.
Meaningful activity participation has been identified as a key outcome of services designed to support individuals during and following homelessness. Little is known about the effectiveness of interventions for promoting this outcome. To identify the range and effectiveness of interventions on promoting meaningful activity participation among persons with experiences of homelessness. We conducted a systematic review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology following PRISMA guidelines including a critical appraisal and narrative synthesis. Of 12,343 titles and abstracts screened, we included 12 studies. The authors of the included studies primarily used standardized measures of meaningful activity engagement. Critical appraisal scores ranged from 50.0 to 77.8. The most common interventions evaluated in the included studies were psychosocial interventions ( = 6; 50.0%), followed by case management and housing support interventions ( = 4; 33.3%) and Housing First ( = 2; 16.7%). While several interventions demonstrated effectiveness in promoting meaningful activity participation including psychosocial and case management interventions, Housing First, Critical Time Intervention, and a peer support intervention were found to be ineffective for promoting engagement in meaningful activity. Few intervention studies have been conducted that demonstrate effectiveness for promoting participation in meaningful activity for individuals during and following homelessness. Occupational therapy researchers and practitioners can build on existing evidence by developing and evaluating novel approaches by co-designing interventions in collaboration with persons with experiences of homelessness and service providers.
有意义的活动参与已被确定为旨在支持无家可归者及其后的关键服务成果之一。然而,对于促进这一结果的干预措施的有效性知之甚少。本研究旨在确定促进有过 homelessness 经历的个体参与有意义活动的干预措施的范围和有效性。我们采用 Joanna Briggs 研究所的方法并遵循 PRISMA 指南进行了系统评价,包括批判性评估和叙述性综合。在筛选出的 12343 篇标题和摘要中,我们纳入了 12 项研究。纳入研究的作者主要使用了有意义活动参与的标准化测量工具。批判性评估得分范围为 50.0 至 77.8。纳入研究中评估最多的干预措施是心理社会干预(n = 6;50.0%),其次是个案管理和住房支持干预(n = 4;33.3%)和优先安置(n = 2;16.7%)。虽然一些干预措施在促进有意义的活动参与方面表现出有效性,包括心理社会和个案管理干预,但 Housing First、关键时间干预和同伴支持干预在促进有意义的活动参与方面被认为是无效的。很少有干预研究证明在促进无家可归者及其后的个体参与有意义活动方面的有效性。职业治疗研究人员和从业者可以通过与有 homelessness 经历的个体和服务提供者合作共同设计干预措施,开发和评估新的方法,从而在现有证据的基础上进一步发展。