Education of Occupational Therapists in Mental Health: A Global Survey of Educators Regarding Perceived Facilitators and Barriers

Abstract

Background: Occupational therapists can address worldwide mental health (MH) needs and workforce shortages. Ways to advance occupational therapy education to build occupational therapist workforce capacity in MH require further investigation.

Objective: This study aimed to identify perceived barriers to and facilitators for advancing MH occupational therapy education, as rated by occupational therapy educators from across the world, stratified into groups of high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

Method: Global survey, Likert-type, created and distributed by the World Federation of Occupational Therapists. Data were subject to a secondary weighted and subgroup analysis.

Results: A total of 155 responses were obtained from occupational therapy educators from 45 countries or territories; 69% of the respondents were from HICs. The weighted analysis showed that educational standards and student interest were large facilitators for both HICs and LMICs. Faculty expertise stood out as a facilitator and the lack thereof as a barrier, both across HICs and LMICs. For HICs, regulation issues, lack of recognition, lack of supervised/fieldwork practice, and lack of workforce demand were frequently reported barriers, whereas lack of teaching resources and practice evidence were often perceived as barriers in LMICs.

Conclusions: Capacity building approaches are required to advance MH occupational therapy education, with tailored approaches for HICs and LMICs.

Keywords: education; mental health; occupational therapists; occupational therapy; survey.

Figure 1

Non-weighted, worldwide results, including “no impact” answers, for the factors positively or negatively impacting the education of occupational therapists for practice in mental health.

Figure 2

Worldwide results for the weighted barriers or facilitators for the education of occupational therapists in mental health. Legend: Factors were weighted, ranked, and then translated into 100% stacked bars. The values reflect a differential weight for the magnitude of the response direction (i.e., high negative impact answers count double the value of ‘low negative’ responses for the red bar; ‘high positive’ impact answers count double the value of ‘low positive’ responses for the green bar). The weighted results were then ranked, from the most positive to the most negative influence. The weighted, ranked results were translated into 100%-stack bars (i.e., sum of the red and green bar for the same item = 100%). The full description is available on Table 1.

Figure 3

Low and Middle-Income Countries’ (LMICs) weighted barriers and facilitators for the education of occupational therapists in mental health. Legend: The weighted values reflect a differential weight for the magnitude of the response direction (i.e., high negative impact answers count double the value of ‘low negative’ responses for the red bar; ‘high positive’ impact answers count double the value of ‘low positive’ responses for the green bar). The weighted results were ranked in the same order of the non-stratified results, for comparative purposes among countries of varied income levels. The weighted results were translated into 100%-stack bars (i.e., sum of the red and green bar for the same item = 100%) for easier interpretation. The full description is available in Table 1.

Figure 4

High-Income Countries’ (HICs) weighted barriers and facilitators for the education of occupational therapists in mental health. Legend: The weighted values reflect a differential weight for the magnitude of the response direction (i.e., high negative impact answers count double the value of ‘low negative’ responses for the red bar; ‘high positive’ impact answers count double the value of ‘low positive’ responses for the green bar). The weighted results were ranked in the same order of the non-stratified results, for comparative purposes among countries of varied income levels. The weighted results were translated into 100%-stack bars (i.e., sum of the red and green bar for the same item = 100%) for easier interpretation. The full description is available in Table 1.