record ON THE Occupational Therapists from Across Ontario are Helping Shape the Quality Assurance Program

Transcription

1 record ON THE VOLUME 8 ISSUE 1 WINTER 2008 Occupational Therapists from Across Ontario are Helping Shape the Quality Assurance Program Les ergothérapeutes de l Ontario aident à perfectionner le programme d assurance de la qualité Assessment Standards Part 3 A Profile of Occupational Therapists Practicing in Ontario, Getting up to Speed on the Latest Technology

2 WINTER 2008 ON THE record VOLUME 8 ISSUE 1 Publications Account: On the Record is printed on recycled paper using vegetable-based inks. ON THE RECORD IS PUBLISHED THREE TIMES PER YEAR BY THE COLLEGE OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPISTS OF ONTARIO Contents Promoting Competent Practice Applying principles of competent practice Occupational Therapists from Across Ontario are Helping Shape the Quality Assurance Program... 3 Les ergothérapeutes de l Ontario aident à perfectionner le programme d assurance de la qualité... 9 Assessment Standards Part Just The Facts Competency-related statistics and evaluation Update on Use of College Database for Health Human Resource Planning Legislation Update A Profile of Occupational Therapists Practicing in Ontario, Questions and Answers College News Getting up to Speed on the Latest Technology Staffing Update Council Highlights...26 Certified of Registration Reinstated Upon Payment of Fees Annual Registration OTs work with children to facilitate their skills and function within a classroom. Letters to the Editor To express your views on editorial content or any College matter, please contact the Editor by mail, phone or Jeff Payette Communications Coordinator College of Occupational Therapists of Ontario 20 Bay Street, Suite 900 P.O. Box 78 Toronto, Ontario M5J 2N8 Phone: ext 222 Toll Free: Fax: jpayette@coto.org Council Officers and Chairs Carol Mieras, President Marie Eason Klatt, Vice-President Upali Obeyesekere, Member at Large Finance Maria Lee, Member at Large Education Jonathan Cheung, Chair, Registration Committee Pasquale Fiorino, Chair, Complaints Committee Ruth Young, Chair, Discipline Committee Bonny Jung, Chair, Fitness to Practise Committee Jan Polgar, Chair, Quality Assurance Committee Sylvia Boddener, Chair, Patient Relations Committee College Staff Karen Giallelis Quality Programs Associate Extension 239, kgiallelis@coto.org Anita Jacobson Practice Resource Consultant Extension 240, practice@coto.org Layla Janvrin Executive Assistant-Registrar Extension 232, ljanvrin@coto.org Lisa Anne LaBillois Finance and Operations Associate Extension 221, llabillois@coto.org Elinor Larney Deputy Registrar Extension 233, elarney@coto.org Andrea Lowes Manager, Investigations & Resolutions Extension 223, alowes@coto.org Pam Marler Registration Coordinator Extension 229, pmarler@coto.org Jeff Payette Communication Coordinator Extension 222, jpayette@coto.org Sue Price Registrant Services Associate Extension 224, sprice@coto.org Marion Rantin Executive Assistant-Deputy Registrar Extension 228, mrantin@coto.org Jewelle Smith-Johnson Director of Operations & Communications Extension 226, jsmith-johnson@coto.org Genevieve Trickey Investigations & Resolutions Associate Extension 234, gtrickey@coto.org Leanne Worsfold Manager Quality Programs Extension 227, lworsfold@coto.org Barbara Worth Registrar Extension 225, bworth@coto.org 2

3 Occupational Therapists from Across Ontario are Helping Shape the Quality Assurance Program Leanne Worsfold, Manger Quality Programs OTs from across the province have completed surveys, provided feedback, showcased key work, and participated in focus groups and item writing sessions to support the development of QA tools. The 2007 National Continuing Competency Conference (NCCC) was a time for the College and the Quality Assurance (QA) Committee to showcase their leadership. Elinor Larney, Deputy Registrar and Marta Krywonis, OT Reg. (Ont.), former member of the College s Quality Assurance Committee, presented the highly regarded, successful Prescribed Regulatory Education Program (PREP). This poster presentation celebrated the success of the PREP Modules, quoting statistics gathered from participating OTs, dating back to the launch of the first PREP Module in Prescribed Regulatory Education Program (PREP) The 2007 PREP Module: Being a Regulated Health Care Professional What Occupational Therapists Need to Know, was distributed to 4283 Registrants with a return rate College of Occupational Therapists of Ontario Deputy Registrar, Elinor Larney and Leanne Worsfold, Manager, Quality Programs of 53% (2257), which is consistent with the response rate of 52% over the past two years. Of 2257 returned Response Sheets, 53% of the respondents submitted via facsimile. There was a 24.2% increase in the responses received online in comparison to This choice of submission method produces significant cost savings over the other two submission methods offered to Registrants. Of those who submitted the 2007 PREP Module Response Sheet, the majority of respondents (84.2%) indicated that the nature of their practice consists mainly of clinical practice; 4.7% were mostly non-clinical but maintain some clinical practice; 6.2% indicated that their practice consisted of all non-clinical practice; 3.8% did not 3

4 indicate a practice, and 1.1% indicated that they were not practicing. All Registrants currently registered with the College are required to complete the PREP Module and submit the completed Response Sheets. This includes those OTs who hold current registration and are not employed, or are taking a leave of absence from their position, such as an OT on maternity leave. The College welcomes and encourages group completion of these modules, but asks that all Registrants submit their own individual response sheet to the College, even if they complete the module as a group. When rating the effectiveness and relevance of this module, 48.4 % strongly agreed that the topic of regulatory legislation was relevant to their practice. Similarly, 44.4% indicted that the module helped them understand how regulatory legislation applies to their practice. This is a decrease from previous years. However, Registrants new to practice provided positive feedback that this module enhanced their knowledge of self-regulation, and many OTs provided comments that the Reminder PREP Module 1: Responsibilities of a Regulated Health Professional was retired with the distribution of the 2007 PREP Module: Being a Regulated Health Professional. Our Registrant Resource Binder. mandatory reporting appendix provided a valuable resource. The profession fought to achieve selfregulation, and it is important that all OTs understand the importance and relevance of the regulatory world in their day-to-day practice. Best Responses to each Scenario The majority of Registrants (89.9%) responded to all but two questions correctly. Given the responses, the College noted two key areas of learning that were required: Use of Title and Specialist Status. Scenario E addressed these areas and reinforced the requirement to use the title OT Reg. (Ont.). The best choice, Option 1 received 66.5% of the responses; Option 4, which was an incorrect response that suggested OTs can promote oneself as a specialist, received 25.8% of the responses. Based on the relatively low selection of the correct option, it can be assumed that there is a need for more understanding about the topic of specialization in the profession. The correct option informs the reader that OTs can describe their area of interest and any additional training they have so long as they do not imply specialist status or qualifications. Question B created the most difficulty for respondents. It focused on the risk/benefit assessment based on the client s needs and best interest. The majority of respondents, 85.2%, selected response Option 2 as the correct answer. This answer was partially correct. The best choice, Option 3, received only 6.9% of the responses. This may be due to the wording of the questions, as the nature of each question was similar. In the winter and spring of this year, the following two PREP Modules will be revised to include current references to College documents and practice standards: Communication and Regulated Health Professionals and The Prevention of Sexual Abuse. These revised modules will not be distributed to all Registrants, but will be posted on the website and available upon request. Competency Review and Evaluation Jan Miller Polgar, Chair QA Committee and Tracy Brigeen, former COTO Manager, Quality Programs, presented the QA Program Logic Model at the NCCC. The Program Logic Model outlines a systematic process for enhancing and evaluating the QA Program, as well as tools to increase conscious, competent practice among OTs. The development of this model demonstrates the College s commitment to enhancing and improving the QA Program processes and tools. In addition, the module supports an educational experience for participating OTs, and protects the public by ensuring that OTs are competent practitioners. This past year, the QA Committee undertook the task of revising the multi-source feedback 4

5 surveys and the peer assessment tools. OTs from across the province participated in focus groups to provide feedback on the development of the multi-source feedback questions. Their input was valuable in improving on the previous processes, making them less arduous, and creating survey questions inclusive to all participant groups. Stage 2 of the random selection process was the next project requiring revisions: a peer assessment. Focus groups which included practicing OTs were held in order to identify the key competencies that needed to be assessed in The Essential Competencies of Practice for Occupational Therapist in Canada, 2nd Edition. A separate group of OTs participated in a two day item writing session to develop core questions and scoring for the peer assessment tools. All item writers agreed that it is critical to have practising OTs support the writing of the peer assessment questions. Sandra Sahagian Whalen, a peer assessor Jan Miller Polgar, Chair, QA Committee and an independent practitioner who attended the session confirms, It is critical to have meaningful tools that reflect current OT practice. Engaging OTs in this process ensures the language is meaningful to OTs and reflective of current practice. Elizabeth McLaney, Professional Practice Leader at Saint Joseph s Health Centre, Toronto explains, Participating in the tool development was an excellent experience for me. It was a reflective exercise, as questions naturally facilitated a reflective process as we tried to think of practice examples when writing the assessment questions. I also feel more prepared to describe the quality assurance process to others if they have questions. Biraj Khosla, OT and Clinical Training and Education Coordinator at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health states that participating in the item writing sessions has increased his confidence that the tools are valid and relevant to OT practice. The revised peer assessment tools will include a web-based element which will provide a means for the QA Program to engage a sufficient number of OTs in a peer assessment, in a cost-effective manner. The Quality Assurance Program online delivery system will also support ease of confidential communication between the OT, peer assessor and the College. It will also support a practicerelevant assessment and timely delivery of reports for participating Registrants. These revised peer assessment tools and the Quality Assurance Program online delivery system will be piloted with peer assessors prior to implementation in the Spring of Portfolio and Multi-Source Feedback Survey Results For the 2007 Competency Review and Evaluation, 239 Registrants engaged in Competency Review and Evaluation: Step 1. This was a review of the Registrants completed QA mandatory tools from their Professional Portfolio and multisource feedback survey process. Of the 239 participating OTs, 205 successfully completed the portfolio review. 34 were required to submit additional material for a minimum of two consecutive selfevaluation cycles, as their portfolios were incomplete. Based on the results of the multi-source feedback survey, of the 239 participating OTs, 17 were required to continue on with Step 2, a peer assessment. The main purpose of engaging in the multi-source feedback survey process is to provide formative feedback to the OTs from the 5

6 perspective of their co-workers and clients. It also provides a means to compare their performance against their peers (norm reference). The results provide feedback to OTs who can then improve or maintain the highest quality practice. The survey results also identify Registrants whose performance differs from those of their peers based on competencies. Results are used as a screening tool to determine the Registrants who are required to engage in the peer assessment. The Quality Assurance Committee also reviews the individual survey results during the Competency Review and Evaluation: Step 2 process. The multi-source feedback survey questions are identified with a specific Essential Competency listed in The Essential Competency for the Practice of Occupational Therapists in Canada, 2nd Edition, and results have been grouped into the Competency Units. OTs who received their multi-source feedback Performance Profiles (survey results) can refer to this document to determine their area of learning, based on the score provided for each Competency Unit. OTs engaging in Competency Review and Evaluation had a positive experience reviewing their accomplishments and obtaining feedback from their clients and co-workers. Eva Viires, an OT at Sioux Lookout MenoYa Win Health Centre explains, One of the great things that evolved out of my participation in the Competency Review and Evaluation was the feeling of being more connected with the college. Shelley Friedman, a self-employed OT for COTA explains, This process, while a little daunting, was a positive experience for me as it encouraged me to review my Professional Portfolio Binder and reflect on my practice. The College received the following letter from a Registrant following their selection and participation in the Competency Review process. My initial reaction to having been randomly selected to participate in the Competency Review process was not a positive one. I was anxious about it and felt that I did not have the time to devote to the process. Having now completed the process, I must say that it was a positive experience and I truly see the value in it. This process has reinforced for me the need for us, as registered therapists, to be accountable and to ensure that we are participating in the best practices of our profession. This process has also left me with a heightened sense of pride in and respect for our profession and the strict guidelines that we must follow and adhere to in order to ensure that we are all qualified to perform our duties for the safety and protection of our clients. I truly value the fact that as regulated professionals, we must follow a certain evaluation process that ensures that we practice safely and effectively. The term regulated profession now has new meaning for me. Although I can't believe that I am saying this, thank you for the experience. The whole process was, in fact, not as time consuming as I thought it would be! Back row from left Biraj Khosla, Leanne Worsfold, Melissa Collins, Megan Truman, Laura Shapiro, Erika Pond-Clements, Danielle Medeiros, Gabriele Wright Front row from left My Hang, Phyllis Wong, Elizabeth McLaney, Sandra Whalen, Nancy Clark Sincerely, Adeena Winsenthal OT Reg. (Ont.), M. Ed. (Counselling) 6

7 Registrants have also informed the College that further work is needed to expedite processes and improve how multi-source feedback results are reported. COTO appreciates the feedback. The College is committed to continuous quality improvement. OTs participating in the 2007 Competency Review and Evaluation demonstrated high standards of practice. These high standards are consistent with other professions findings. Dr. Claudio Violato, the psychometrics expert hired by the College to support the redesign of the multi-source feedback surveys, has published findings from other regulatory bodies and states, The mean rating on surveys are generally quite high. For example, the mean for Medical Radiation Technologist was 4.58 (min = 4.21, max= 4.75), on a 5 point rating scale. Similar results have been found in multi-source feedback for family physicians and many physician specialists. The College of Occupational Therapists of Ontario has traditionally found high scores as well. For example, the average scores for the year 2003, client and co-worker survey statements ranged from 5.7 to 5.9 on a 6 point rating scale. This year s norm reference scores for each Competency Unit ranged from for the co-worker norm; and for client norm, on a five point rating scale. Each year, a specific number of OTs are required to engage in a peer assessment if their results fall within a set threshold. In 2007, the Quality Assurance Committee set a threshold of the 7th percentile. Those OTs who fall within or below this threshold are required to proceed with Competency Review and Evaluation: Step 2 a peer assessment. This staged approach, which has been adopted since the year 2000, allows for the screening of a large number of Registrants in a timely, cost-efficient manner. To determine the 7th percentile mean of co-workers scores, a standard normal distribution was employed. For the 2007 random selection, 17 OTs fell within this threshold and are proceeding to Competency Review and Evaluation: Step 2, a peer assessment. In previous years, individual Registrant results were based on a very limited number of surveys (approximately 3-6). The thresholds to determine if further assessment was required were set by a group of experienced OTs who worked with an evaluation consultant to set the acceptable rating for each survey question. The thresholds ranged from 5.07 to 5.69 on 6 point scale. This year, individual results are based on completed surveys, and the set threshold is based on the norm reference score from 2,621 completed co-worker surveys submitted in the 2007 process. Setting a norm reference is superior to determining criterionreferenced feedback, as it is difficult to set a priori cut score for multisource feedback systems, and scores are based on real data from a large reference group. Norm reference is a very widely used procedure, with all types of assessments conducted in medicine, psychology, education, and health professions in general. Some OTs are concerned that even though they have scored relatively high, their results are below the norm (below the norm average). The multi-source feedback system provides the normative performance and is intended to provide a point of reference. To provide a comparable example, consider if a class average or mean score is 89%, those who fall below this score are considered below the average. The same principles apply to this system; a number of OTs will fall below the average as they are compared to the normative group whose scores are traditionally high. The revisions to the QA program started in 2007 will position both OTs and the College in a favorable situation when the amended Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 comes into effect in June In the coming months, the QA Committee and staff will continue to revise the QA program tools and focus on aligning our regulations with the new legislation. Feedback from OTs and key stakeholders will be valuable as we move forward with shaping new QA processes and regulations to meet the obligations and responsibilities outlined in the Act. 7

8 Multi-source feedback co-worker survey norms are summarized as follows: Data is based on 2,621 co-worker surveys Competencies Min Max Mean Std. Error of the Mean Std. Deviation Skew Professional Responsibilities Practice Knowledge Practice Process Thinks Critically Communication Professional Development Manages Practice Environment Multi-source feedback client survey norms are summarized as follows: Data is based on 2,934 client surveys Competencies Min Max Mean Std. Error of the Mean Std. Deviation Skew Professional Responsibilities Practice Process Communication Professional Development Manages Practice Environment

9 Les ergothérapeutes de l Ontario aident à perfectionner le programme d assurance de la qualité Leanne Worsfold, Manger Quality Programs Les ergothérapeutes à l échelle de la province ont rempli leurs questionnaires, donné leurs commentaires, présenté leurs activités principales et participé à des groupes de discussion et des séances de rédaction pour appuyer l élaboration d outils pour le programme d assurance de la qualité (AQ). La National Continuing Competency Conference (NCCC) de 2007 a été une bonne occasion pour l Ordre et le comité de l assurance de la qualité de démontrer leur leadership. Mme Elinor Larney, registraire adjointe, et Mme Marta Krywonis, Erg. Aut. (Ont.) et ancien membre du comité de l assurance de la qualité (Ordre des ergothérapeutes de l Ontario), ont présenté le Programme d éducation réglementaire prescrit (PÉRP) très réussi et bien reconnu. Cette présentation par affiches célébrait le succès des modules PÉRP et fournissait des statistiques recueillies auprès d ergothérapeutes participants depuis le lancement du premier module PÉRP en Programme d éducation réglementaire prescrit (PÉRP) Le module PÉRP de 2007 intitulé En tant que professionnels de la santé réglementés : Ce que les ergothérapeutes de l Ontario doivent savoir a été distribué à membres inscrits et 53 % (2 257) de ces personnes ont fait le module, ce qui est compatible avec les résultats des deux dernières années (52 %). Sur les feuilles de réponses qui ont été remplies, 53 % ont été envoyées par télécopieur. Il y a eu une augmentation de 24,2 % dans le nombre de feuilles remplies en ligne, par rapport à Ce choix de méthode de soumission représente une économie importante des coûts de traitement par rapport aux deux autres méthodes offertes aux membres. La majorité (84,2 %) des personnes qui ont rempli la feuille de réponses du module PÉRP de 2007 ont indiqué que leur type de pratique était surtout clinique, 4,7 % avaient une pratique un peu clinique mais surtout non clinique, 6,2 % avaient une pratique non clinique seulement, 3,8 % n indiquaient pas leur type de pratique et 1,1 % n avaient aucune pratique présentement. Tous les membres inscrits à l Ordre des ergothérapeutes de l Ontario doivent faire le module PÉRP et envoyer la feuille de réponses remplie. Ceci comprend les ergothérapeutes qui sont présentement membres mais ne travaillent pas ou prennent un congé autorisé (par exemple un congé de maternité). L Ordre encourage et apprécie que des ergothérapeutes se rassemblent pour faire le module en groupe mais demande à chaque membre de présenter sa propre feuille de réponses à l Ordre. Lorsqu ils évaluaient l efficacité et la pertinence de ce module, 48,4 % ont été vraiment d accord que ce module sur les lois de régle mentation était très pertinent pour leur pratique. De même, 44,4 % 9

10 ont indiqué que ce module les a aidé à comprendre comment les lois de réglementation peuvent s appliquer à leur type de pratique. Il s agit d une diminution par rapport aux années passées. Toutefois, les membres qui commencent seulement à exercer leur profession ont été positifs et ont déclaré que ce module les a aidé à mieux connaître le processus d autoréglementation et plusieurs ergothérapeutes ont signalé que l annexe sur la déclaration obligatoire était une ressource pratique. Les ergothérapeutes ont travaillé fort pour obtenir l autoréglementation de leur profession et ils doivent tous comprendre l importance et la pertinence de la réglementation dans leur pratique quotidienne. Les meilleures réponses pour chaque scénario La majorité des membres inscrits (89,9 %) ont répondu à toutes les questions, sauf deux, correctement. D après les réponses, l Ordre a remarqué un problème d apprentissage important : l utilisation du titre et du statut de spécialiste. Le scénario E discutait de ce point et mettait l accent sur l exigence d utiliser le titre Erg. Aut. (Ont.). L option 1 (le meilleur choix) a Rappel : Le module PÉRP 1 Responsabilités d un professionnel de la santé réglementé a été retiré avec la distribution du module PÉRP de 2007 intitulé En tant que professionnels de la santé réglementés. obtenu 66,5 % des votes et l option 4 (une réponse incorrecte qui suggérait que les ergothérapeutes pouvaient promouvoir leurs services en tant que spécialistes) a obtenu 25,8 % des votes. Compte tenu du pourcentage relativement faible de personnes qui ont choisi la bonne réponse, on peut avancer qu il existe un besoin de mieux expliquer le sujet de la spécialisation dans la profession d ergothérapeute. La bonne réponse signale aux ergothérapeutes qu ils peuvent décrire leurs domaines d intérêt et toute formation additionnelle reçue en autant qu ils ne s appellent pas des spécialistes. Le scénario B a été le plus difficile. Il portait sur une évaluation des risques et bienfaits en fonction des besoins et du meilleur intérêt du client. La majorité des ergothérapeutes (85,2 %) ont choisi l option 2 mais cette réponse n était que partiellement correcte. L option 3 (le meilleur choix) a obtenu seulement 6,9 % des votes. Il se peut que cela soit dû à la façon dont la question a été posée puisque le contenu des options était de nature similaire. Au cours de l hiver et du printemps de cette année, les deux modules PÉRP suivants seront révisés pour mettre à jour les références aux documents et normes d exercice de l Ordre : La communication et les professionnels de la santé réglementés et La prévention des mauvais traitements d ordre sexuel. Ces modules révisés ne seront pas distribués à tous les membres inscrits mais ils seront disponibles sur demande. Examen et évaluation de la compétence Mme Jan Miller Polgar, présidente du comité de l assurance de la qualité et professeure agrégée de l école d ergothérapie de l université Western Ontario, et Mme Tracy Brigeen, ancienne directrice des programmes sur la qualité de l OEO, ont présenté le modèle logique du programme d AQ à la NCCC. Ce modèle donne un aperçu d un processus systématique pour améliorer et évaluer le programme d AQ ainsi que des outils pour favoriser une pratique plus consciente et compétente de la part des ergothérapeutes. L élaboration de ce modèle démontre l engagement de l Ordre à améliorer les processus et outils de son programme d assurance de la qualité. De plus, le module offre une expérience éducationnelle pour les ergothérapeutes qui exercent leur profession et protège le public en assurant la compétence des ergothérapeutes. Au cours de la dernière année, le comité de l assurance de la qualité a entrepris la révision des questionnaires multisources sur l exercice de la profession et les outils d évaluation par les pairs. Des ergothérapeutes provenant d un peu partout dans la province ont participé à des groupes de discussion pour donner leurs 10

11 commentaires sur l élaboration des questions posées. Ces commentaires ont été extrêmement utiles pour améliorer les processus antérieurs et les rendre moins ardus, ainsi que pour rédiger des questions qui visent tous les groupes de participants. Le deuxième stade du processus de sélection au hasard était le projet suivant qui avait besoin d être révisé : une évaluation par les pairs. Des groupes de discussion formés d ergothérapeutes exerçant leur profession ont été organisés pour identifier les principales compétences qui avaient besoin d être évaluées dans Les compétences essentielles à la pratique pour les ergothérapeutes au Canada, 2e édition. Un autre groupe d ergothérapeutes a participé à une séance de rédaction de deux jours pour élaborer des questions de base et un système de pointage pour les outils d évaluation par les pairs. Tous les rédacteurs croyaient qu il était vital que des ergothérapeutes exerçant leur profession appuient la rédaction des questions pour l évaluation par les pairs. Mme Sandra Sahagian Whalen, une évaluatrice des pairs de l OEO et une ergothérapeute avec une pratique indépendante, a assisté à la séance et a confirmé qu il «était essentiel d avoir des outils significatifs pour les ergothérapeutes qui reflètent l exercice actuel de la profession». En faisant participer les ergothérapeutes à ce processus, on s assure que le langage est pertinent pour les ergothérapeutes et représentatif de la profession actuelle. Mme Elizabeth McLaney, chef de pratique professionnelle au Centre de santé St-Joseph de Toronto, déclare : «Participer à l élaboration d outils a été une excellente expérience pour moi. C était un exercice de réflexion puisque le processus nous faisait naturellement réfléchir pour essayer de trouver des exemples de question reflétant l exercice de la profession. Je me sens également mieux en mesure de décrire le processus d assurance de la qualité à d autres personnes.» M. Biraj Khosla, un ergothérapeute et coordonnateur de l éducation et de la formation clinique au Centre de toxicomanie et de santé mentale, déclare que sa participation aux séances de rédaction lui a donné une plus grande confiance dans la validité et la pertinence des outils pour l exercice de l ergothérapie. Les outils révisés d évaluation par les pairs comprendront un élément en ligne qui permettra au programme d AQ de faire participer de manière rentable un nombre suffisant d ergothérapeutes dans des évaluations par les pairs. Le système de prestation en ligne du programme d AQ permettra également d assurer la confidentialité des communications entre l ergothérapeute, l évaluateur et l Ordre. Il appuiera aussi une évaluation pertinente de la pratique et une présentation de rapports en temps opportun aux membres participants. Ces outils révisés d évaluation par les pairs et le système de prestation en ligne du programme d assurance de la qualité feront l objet d essais par les évaluateurs des pairs avant leur mise en œuvre au printemps Le portefeuille professionnel et les résultats des questionnaires multisources sur l exercice de la profession Pour l examen et l évaluation de la compétence de 2007, 239 membres inscrits ont participé à l étape 1 du processus. Il s agissait de l examen des outils obligatoires remplis du programme d AQ se trouvant dans le portefeuille professionnel des membres et des questionnaires multisources sur l exercice de la profession. Sur les 239 ergothérapeutes qui ont participé, 205 ont réussi l examen du portefeuille. Trente-quatre (34) ergothérapeutes ont dû présenter du matériel supplémentaire pendant au moins deux cycles consécutifs d autoévaluation car leurs portefeuilles étaient incomplets. D après les résultats des questionnaires multisources sur l exercice de la profession, 17 des 239 ergothérapeutes participants doivent passer à l étape 2 l évaluation par les pairs. Le but principal des questionnaires multisources sur l exercice de la profession est de fournir 11