Martin Daniel, Fuller Hope, Collins Madison, Courtright Victoria, Joshi Manisha, Hubbard Kelly, Kretzer Faith, Lantzy Claire, Ragsdale Sydney, Servera Autumn, Shanholtz Cathy
Daniel Martin, DSc, OTR/L, is Assistant Professor, Division of Occupational Therapy, Shenandoah University, Winchester, VA;
Hope Fuller, BS, is Occupational Therapy Student, Division of Occupational Therapy, Shenandoah University, Winchester, VA.
Am J Occup Ther. 2024 Nov 1;78(6). doi: 10.5014/ajot.2024.050702.
One primary function of occupational therapy state licensure boards (SLBs) is the discipline of ethical misconduct by licensed occupational therapy practitioners. However, SLB sanctioning is poorly understood by practitioners, regulators, and the public.
To identify predictors of occupational therapy practitioner sanctioning outcomes in the United States.
Retrospective study; all public final consent orders and database entries provided online by SLBs were analyzed. Supervised gradient boosting machine learning, logistic regression, and contingency tables were used to generate odds ratios for variables associated with each sanctioning outcome. Multinomial testing was used to identify attribute overrepresentation among cases and national practitioner distributions.
A total of 2,400 cases were analyzed across 47 states and Washington, DC.
None.
Numerous complaint and respondent attribute variables were collected from final consent orders and database entries.
Complaint reason, practice setting, and complaint source had the highest influence on predicting sanction outcome; geographic region, number of complaints in a given case, and length of investigation in months were secondarily influential. Being male or a certified occupational therapy assistant was associated with higher odds of severe sanctioning outcomes.
Disciplinary actions against occupational therapy practitioners were determined by numerous contextual factors; however, the most influential factors were complaint reason, practice setting, and complaint source. These results provide direction for exploring factors that predict sanctioning outcomes in the United States and also provide occupational therapy practitioners and SLBs a basis of applied outcomes that may improve implementation and education regarding clinical practice ethics. Plain-Language Summary: Occupational therapy state licensure boards (SLBs) are responsible for disciplining licensed occupational therapy practitioners for ethical misconduct. SLB sanctioning is poorly understood by practitioners, regulators, and the public. In this study, we identify the factors that predict the sanctioning outcomes of occupational therapy practitioners. The results may help state regulators, educators, and national associations more effectively act in a way that protects the public faith in occupational therapy services by providing contextualized information on practitioner behaviors that result in specific sanctioning outcomes. The study findings also provide occupational therapy practitioners and SLBs a basis of applied outcomes that may improve the implementation of and education regarding clinical practice ethics.
职业治疗州执照委员会(SLB)的一项主要职能是对持牌职业治疗从业者的道德不当行为进行惩戒。然而,从业者、监管机构和公众对SLB的制裁了解甚少。
确定美国职业治疗从业者制裁结果的预测因素。
回顾性研究;分析了SLB在线提供的所有公开最终同意令和数据库条目。使用监督梯度提升机器学习、逻辑回归和列联表来生成与每个制裁结果相关变量的优势比。多项测试用于确定案例和全国从业者分布中属性的过度代表性。
对47个州和华盛顿特区的2400个案例进行了分析。
无。
从最终同意令和数据库条目中收集了大量投诉和被调查者属性变量。
投诉原因、执业环境和投诉来源对预测制裁结果的影响最大;地理区域、特定案例中的投诉数量以及以月为单位的调查时长其次有影响。男性或认证职业治疗助理受到严厉制裁结果的几率更高。
对职业治疗从业者的纪律处分由众多背景因素决定;然而,最具影响力的因素是投诉原因、执业环境和投诉来源。这些结果为探索美国制裁结果的预测因素提供了方向,也为职业治疗从业者和SLB提供了应用结果的基础,这可能会改善临床实践伦理的实施和教育。
职业治疗州执照委员会(SLB)负责对持牌职业治疗从业者的道德不当行为进行惩戒。从业者、监管机构和公众对SLB的制裁了解甚少。在本研究中,我们确定了预测职业治疗从业者制裁结果的因素。这些结果可能有助于州监管机构、教育工作者和全国性协会更有效地采取行动,通过提供导致特定制裁结果的从业者行为的背景信息,保护公众对职业治疗服务的信任。研究结果还为职业治疗从业者和SLB提供了应用结果的基础,这可能会改善临床实践伦理的实施和教育。