The Biomechanical Frame of Reference for Positioning Children for Function is a Frame of Reference theory. The goals of this theory are to increase the development of postural reactions and to improve functional performance. The focus is on static positions rather than transitional movements. The theory may be used with children or adolescents with physical disabilities. Individuals with a musculoskeletal or neuromuscular dysfunction who are unable to maintain posture are the specific target population. The theory measures function and dysfunction in the areas of range of motion, head control, trunk control, control of arm movement, mobility, and positions related to activities of daily living (toileting, self-feeding). The components of postural dysfunction are measured for intervention. Areas of assessment include range of motion against gravity, right reactions of the head and trunk, hand positioning, and mobilization of limbs. Assistive devices may be prescribed to enhance postural stability and posture while performing functional activities. Key terms included in this theory include postural reactions, neuromuscular and musculoskeletal dysfunction, and intervention planning. Postural reactions are the early motor reactions of children (primitive reflexes). Neuromuscular and musculoskeletal dysfunction are any problems with the musculature and nerves. Intervention planning is what is done in relation to the problem area. It includes what is to be done to improve functioning.
Overall, my glyphs did not change much over the course of the last year. The two main differences between my glyphs were in the eyelashes and the finishing touch signature. On the first glyph, I was able to remember each of the five themes based on my personal Clifton StrengthsFinder assessment. However, I was only able to remember two of the themes for my second glyph. The second difference in my two glyphs was the finishing touch. On my original glyph, I signed my name indicating I had a plan or goal about serving in leadership roles in the future. While that was true at the time, I feel that I do not have as much of a clear plan or goal at this time, which is why I wrote my name in print on the second glyph. Other than those differences, all other elements remained the same. I feel that I had an easier time making decisions about my beliefs about leadership this time compared to the first time I drew it.
Comments
Post a Comment