Skip to main content

Table 2 Global perceived level of competency and percentage of time spent on activities and approaches (highest proportion is bolded)

From: What occupational therapists’ say about their competencies’ enactment, maintenance and development in practice? A two-phase mixed methods study

Currently, how would you rate your competency level, in each of the seven roles, as defined by the CAOT?
 Roles presented in Profile’s order Inadequate n (%) Borderline n (%) Adequate n (%) High
n (%)
Very high
n (%)
I don’t know
n (%)
 Expert in Enabling Occupation (N = 304) 1 (0.3) 9 (3.0) 152 (50.0) 103 (33.9) 39 (12.8) 0
 Communicator (N = 303) 0 9 (3.0) 121 (39.9) 124 (40.9) 49 (16.2) 0
 Collaborator (N = 303) 0 5 (1.7) 63 (20.8) 161 (53.1) 72 (23.8) 2 (0.7)
 Practice Manager (N = 304) 1 (0.3) 30 (9.9) 142 (46.7) 101 (33.2) 29 (9.5) 1 (0.3)
 Change Agent (N = 303) 3 (1.0) 60 (19.8) 155 (51.2) 65 (21.5) 18 (5.9) 2 (0.7)
 Scholarly Practitioner (N = 303) 2 (0.7) 50 (16.5) 158 (52.1) 79 (26.1) 13 (4.3) 1 (0.3)
 Professional (N = 304) 0 1 (0.3) 74 (24.3) 149 (49.0) 80 (26.3) 0
On average, what percentage of your time per week is spent on the following activities?
  0–19% n (%) 20–39% n (%) 40–59% n (%) 60–79% n (%) 80–100% n (%)
 Direct time with clients (n = 302) 19 (6.3) 109 (36.1) 99 (32.8) 60 (19.9) 15 (5.0)
 Preparing for sessions with clients (n = 300) 276 (92.0) 24 (8.0) 0 0 0
 Formal/informal meetings or discussions (n = 299) 263 (88.0) 33 (11.1) 3 (1.0) 0 0
 Writing case notes (clients’ documentation) (n = 301) 82 (27.2) 168 (55.8) 51 (16.9) 0 0
 Reading or looking for evidence-based data (n = 289) 282 (97.6) 5 (1.7) 0 2 (0.7) 0
 Administrative tasks (n = 287) 271(94.4) 14 (4.9) 2 (0.7) 0 0
What percentage of your direct time with clients do you spend on the following approaches per year?
  0–19% n (%) 20–39% n (%) 40–59% n (%) 60–79% n (%) 80–100% n (%)
 Individual (n = 293) 18 (6.2) 27 (9.2) 23 (7.8) 22 (7.5) 203 (69.3)
 Individual with more than one client at a time (n = 208) 142 (68.3) 14 (6.7) 14 (6.7) 16 (7.7) 22 (10.6)
 In group (n = 210) 170 (81.0) 25 (11.9) 10 (4.7) 5 (2.4) 0 (0)
 Populational (n = 168)a 158 (94.0) 6 (3.6) 1 (0.6) 2 (1.2) 1 (0.6)
  1. aResponse rate is probably explained by respondents perceiving this context of practice as not applicable to their situation