Search results for ‘Subject term:"learning disabilities"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Providing care for adults with autistic spectrum disorders in learning disability services: needs-based or diagnosis-driven?
- Authors:
- BENNETT Heather E., WOOD Clare L., HARE Dougal Julian
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18(1), March 2005, pp.57-64.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
This study assessed whether a Learning Disability Service should develop a specific autism strategy or provide services on a needs-led basis. An autism screening questionnaire had been used to identify individuals scoring above a cut-off who had (n = 9) or had not (n = 15) received a formal diagnosis of autism. A sample of low scorers (n = 22) were matched to these groups. Questionnaires assessing service provision, needs (disabilities and challenging behaviour), quality of life and knowledge of autism were sent to relatives of individuals living at home or key-workers for those living in supported housing. The high scoring groups had similar levels of needs. Those diagnosed with autism received more services in total while the high scoring group without autism diagnoses scored significantly lower on quality of life. Although these differences were not maintained when level of disability was taken into account, it appeared that there was some level of unmet need in the high scorers without autism diagnoses group. It appeared that resources should be targeted at identifying and addressing the specific needs of individuals presenting with autistic spectrum difficulties.
Factors influencing the use of psychotropic medication for challenging behaviour in the United Kingdom: a Q method investigation
- Authors:
- WASTELL Sarah, SKIRROW Paul, HARE Dougal Julian
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 29(4), 2016, p.295–304.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
Objectives: The use of pharmacological interventions to manage challenging behaviour displayed by adults with intellectual disabilities remains controversial, with current clinical guidelines in the United Kingdom advocating the use of less invasive psychological interventions. This exploratory study aimed to discover what views and beliefs are held by a sample of NHS professionals who provided care and treatment to adults with learning disabilities, about the factors that are influential in the clinical decision-making process, surrounding the prescription of psychotropic medication, to manage challenging behaviour. Methods: Q methodology was used to elucidate the factors considered influential in the clinical decision-making process, surrounding the prescription of medication to manage challenging behaviour. 55 participants from a range of services across the north–west of England performed a 104 statement Q-sort task. Results: Principle component factor analysis with varimax rotation was performed on the 55 completed Q sorts. This revealed a four factor solution, accounting for 44% of the variance in the data. The factors were interpreted and discussed under the following headings: ‘High-quality safe ethical practice’, Risk is a rationale for reactive prescribing’, ‘Pragmatic management’ and ‘Contextual issues’. Conclusions: The study demonstrated that Q methodology is a useful tool for identifying subjective viewpoints held by a range of professionals, with regard to the factors that influence the clinical decision-making process surrounding the prescription of medication. The study suggests that services need to identify the wider contextual factors, which are barriers, to the use of less invasive psychological interventions. (Publisher abstract)