Giving Feedback to Care Staff about Offering Choices to People with Intellectual Disabilities

2011 ◽  
pp. 161-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. M. L. Finlay ◽  
Chris Walton ◽  
Charles Antaki
2013 ◽  
Vol 203 (4) ◽  
pp. 288-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Willner ◽  
John Rose ◽  
Andrew Jahoda ◽  
Biza Stenfert Kroese ◽  
David Felce ◽  
...  

BackgroundMany people with intellectual disabilities find it hard to control their anger and this often leads to aggression which can have serious consequences, such as exclusion from mainstream services and the need for potentially more expensive emergency placements.AimsTo evaluate the effectiveness of a cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention for anger management in people with intellectual disabilities.MethodA cluster-randomised trial of group-based 12-week CBT, which took place in day services for people with intellectual disabilities and was delivered by care staff using a treatment manual. Participants were 179 service users identified as having problems with anger control randomly assigned to either anger management or treatment as usual. Assessments were conducted before the intervention, and at 16 weeks and 10 months after randomisation (trial registration: ISRCTN37509773).ResultsThe intervention had only a small, and non-significant, effect on participants' reports of anger on the Provocation Index, the primary outcome measure (mean difference 2.8, 95% Cl −1.7 to 7.4 at 10 months). However, keyworker Provocation Index ratings were significantly lower in both follow-up assessments, as were service-user ratings on another self-report anger measure based on personally salient triggers. Both service users and their keyworkers reported greater usage of anger coping skills at both follow-up assessments and keyworkers and home carers reported lower levels of challenging behaviour.ConclusionsThe intervention was effective in improving anger control by people with intellectual disabilities. It provides evidence of the effectiveness of a CBT intervention for this client group and demonstrates that the staff who work with them can be trained and supervised to deliver such an intervention with reasonable fidelity.


2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
Hilary Brown

Purpose – This paper is a commentary on “The effectiveness of psychodynamic interventions for people with learning disabilities: a systematic review” by Chris James and James Stacey. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the thesis that standardised ways of evaluating health care interventions may have the inadvertent effect of undermining the case that people with intellectual disabilities should be offered the same opportunities to address their emotional and mental health difficulties as other citizens. Design/methodology/approach – The commentary argues that while the evidence base focuses on the outcomes of orthodox one-to-one interventions, sometimes broader “contextual reformulation” and systemic interventions are called for. However, family- or service-based interventions tend not to feature in studies. Findings – The commentary illustrates these issues by discussing two case studies, which demonstrate how relational issues tend to be unhelpfully focused on the person with intellectual disabilities to the detriment of family members or direct care staff, who may be struggling to make sense of the person's behaviour or distress. Originality/value – The commentary supports the argument put forward in the longer paper and also argues for mental health services to be offered on a non-discriminatory basis to people with intellectual disabilities and to their family members. But it also suggests that one of the additional impacts of service level psychotherapeutic interventions is to re-establish respect for the work of direct care staff whose work is often presented as if it is little more than domestic drudgery when in fact it involves negotiating and responding to people and their issues with great sensitivity and balance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document