Model of Human Occupation

assessment that serves as a screening tool, as well as a tool tomeasure progress or change over time. A case study within the textprovides an example of the use of the MOHOST in documenting theprogress of a client.I hope this is helpful!Annie PloszajResearch AssistantMOHO ClearinghouseDate: Wed, December 7, 2005 7:02 pmThe MOHOST is so named (screening tool) because it's original use was in acontext where there needed to be a quick early assessment and since thistool often served as a "first screen" to identify areas for furtherassessment as well as identifying strengths and weaknesses in acomprehensive way to guide treatment planning.That said, there are many reasons why the MOHOST CAN be used as an outcomestool.Like any outcomes tool, where the aim is to show improvement due tointervention, one must administer the tool at least twice--at baseline andafter a period of intervention, in order to measure change over time. A tooladministered only at the end of therapy is really not an outcome measure,because there is nothing to compare it to in order to make inferences aboutthe outcome.When choosing an outcome tool for repeated use in clinical settings thereare two main considerations.The first is that the tool should have good psychometric properties asevidenced through research (i.e., that it is reliable, valid and sensitive).While the MOHOST is in the mid stages of development, the evidence thus farsuggests this instrument has excellent measurement properties; A first studyprovided evidence that it is reliable and valid. Another study, that we justcompleted found that each of the factors within the MOHOST (volition,habituation, motor skills, process skills, communication interaction skillsand environment, hold up as distinct factors (in a confirmatory factoranalysis) and show statistically significant differences across groups ofclients. This evidence supports the value of clinical interpretations thatexamine each section of the MOHOST and it also suggests that the MOHOST candistinguish between clients with different patterns of strengths and weaknesses. Alongwith the studies mentioned above, we have also evidence ofgood concurrent validity.