Professional and clinical reasoning in occupational therapy practice
Résumé fourni par la source
This chapter explores the complex processes of professional and clinical reasoning in occupational therapy, emphasising their central role in guiding ethical, client-centred decision-making. It introduces novice therapists to the foundational concepts and skills required to integrate reasoning into practice, acknowledging that these processes often begin as tacit and become more flexible and efficient through experience and reflection. Professional reasoning involves considering the dynamic interplay between people, occupations, and contexts – including cultural, social, and environmental factors – to achieve optimal occupational outcomes. The chapter highlights the importance of cultural safety, resource feasibility, and evidence-based practice in shaping decisions. Five key aspects of reasoning – narrative, interactive, procedural, conditional, and pragmatic – are presented as essential components of the occupational therapy process. These aspects enable therapists to interpret client stories, build collaborative relationships, plan interventions, anticipate future scenarios, and evaluate practical constraints. Influences such as worldview, intuition, and reflective capacity are also discussed, alongside the role of shared decision-making. By understanding and applying these reasoning processes, occupational therapists can make informed, contextually responsive decisions that support clients’ occupational performance and participation. Ultimately, the chapter underscores that professional reasoning is integral to developing competent, adaptable practitioners committed to ethical and effective care.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Professional and clinical reasoning in occupational therapy practice
- Date Crossref
- 09/06/2026
- Éditeur
- Routledge
- Type
- book-chapter
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.