Recently, the World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) introduced a new definition of occupational therapy that feels timely and necessary: “Occupational therapy promotes health and wellbeing by supporting participation in meaningful occupations that people want, need, or are expected to do.” This revised wording marks more than a semantic change; it signals a paradigm shift toward more inclusive, person-centered, and socially responsive care. And from a public health standpoint, this shift couldn't have come at a better time.
Too often, occupational therapy is narrowly understood as a rehabilitation service for those recovering from illness or injury. But the profession has always encompassed more: the prevention of ill health, the promotion of social participation, and the enabling of independence and dignity through everyday activities. The new WFOT definition finally places these broader public health goals at the center.
Why definitions matter
Definitions guide practice, education, funding, and perception. When a profession redefines itself, it influences how it interacts with systems of care, policy frameworks, and communities. In public health, we have long spoken about the social determinants of health—how education, employment, housing, and participation shape physical and mental wellbeing. WFOT’s revised definition positions occupational therapy as a key contributor in addressing these determinants.
This matters for countries like India, where overburdened health systems are increasingly recognizing the need for holistic, community-based care. The shift from disease-centric to person-centered care aligns with India's push towards integrated health services. But despite these efforts, occupational therapy often remains underutilized and misunderstood. A clearer, broader definition could help reposition OT as a vital player in primary health care, especially for vulnerable populations facing mental health challenges, disability, ageing, or displacement.
A public health response to participation gaps
From a public health lens, the term “participation” is powerful. It speaks not only to clinical recovery but to dignity, purpose, and inclusion. Whether someone is returning to work after a stroke, engaging in school as a child with developmental delays, or managing daily activities while living with schizophrenia, occupational therapy supports that participation.
Importantly, the new definition also acknowledges that occupations are not just tasks, but meaningful acts. This reflects cultural diversity, individual choice, and social expectations. These recognizes, what is meaningful varies across people and communities. For example, in rural India, “meaningful occupation” might mean farming, tending livestock, or caring for grandchildren. An inclusive occupational therapy model must respond to such local contexts and the new definition gives us the language to do so.
Expanding practice and collaboration
This change also opens the door for better collaboration between occupational therapists and public health professionals. With its renewed emphasis on health promotion and participation, occupational therapy can play a more explicit role in non-clinical settings: community development, urban planning, education, disaster recovery, and mental health outreach. We saw glimpses of this during the COVID-19 pandemic, when occupational therapists worldwide helped people adapt to new routines, manage stress, and stay connected during lockdowns. Their role extended well beyond hospital walls.
India’s expanding community health workforce, including ASHAs (Accredited Social Health Activists), has shown the power of community-rooted care. Imagine the possibilities if occupational therapists were more embedded in such teams, supporting people to navigate daily life with dignity, particularly in post-discharge or chronic illness settings. This isn’t idealistic—it’s practical, scalable, and cost-effective.
A clearer path for advocacy and education
For occupational therapists, especially students and early-career professionals, this new definition offers clarity and confidence. It helps them articulate what they do—not just to peers and supervisors, but to the communities they serve. For educators and institutions, it offers a framework for updating curricula to reflect a more inclusive, rights-based approach to health.
At the policy level, this reframing can strengthen advocacy efforts to integrate OT into public health programs, especially for populations historically excluded from mainstream services—people with disabilities, older adults, those with chronic conditions, and people affected by mental illness. By making the profession’s value clearer, we can also push for better regulation, recognition, and investment, these areas are still lagging in many low- and middle-income countries.
The road ahead
Of course, a definition alone won’t change systems. But it gives the tools and the responsibility to move towards the right direction. Public health research must continue documenting the impact of occupational therapy beyond clinical metrics, capturing stories of participation, empowerment, and everyday resilience. Health systems must create space for OT within multi-sectoral teams. And occupational therapists must continue advocating for a model of care that sees people not just as patients, but as active agents in their own lives.
By redefining its purpose, the profession is reaffirming its importance to both healthcare and society. As a public health researcher, I view this as a timely and essential shift—because true health goes beyond mere survival; it's about enabling people to live, work, and engage in life with meaning and dignity.