Stakeholder views on the barriers and facilitators of psychosocial interventions to address reduction in aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities.

Intellectual disabilities aggression challenging behaviour community care interventions qualitative methods

Journal

NIHR open research
ISSN: 2633-4402
Titre abrégé: NIHR Open Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918333281906676

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
accepted: 28 07 2023
medline: 26 10 2023
pubmed: 26 10 2023
entrez: 26 10 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Success of psychosocial interventions in reducing aggressive challenging behaviour is likely to be related not only to mechanistic aspects, but also to therapeutic and system factors. The study aims to examine the facilitators and barriers that influence whether psychosocial interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities lead to positive change. We conducted 42 semi-structured interviews with adults with intellectual disabilities and aggressive challenging behaviour, family/paid carers, and professionals engaged in or delivering a psychosocial intervention across the UK. Data were analysed thematically using a framework approach. Stakeholders considered therapeutic and supportive relationships and personalised care as facilitating factors of psychosocial interventions to address aggressive challenging behaviour. The operational structure of community intellectual disability services and conflicting expectations of professionals and carers were the main contextual barriers that impeded the implementation of psychosocial interventions addressing aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities. Findings highlight the valued components that maximise positive change in adults with intellectual disabilities who display aggressive challenging behaviour. Several operational adjustments including referral criteria, roles of professionals and workforce issues need to be addressed in services to maximise the implementation of psychosocial interventions to reduce aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities. The current study looked at what factors that lead to good outcomes from therapies that aim to reduce aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with learning disabilities. We also looked at the factors that may prevent positive change (

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Success of psychosocial interventions in reducing aggressive challenging behaviour is likely to be related not only to mechanistic aspects, but also to therapeutic and system factors. The study aims to examine the facilitators and barriers that influence whether psychosocial interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities lead to positive change.
Methods UNASSIGNED
We conducted 42 semi-structured interviews with adults with intellectual disabilities and aggressive challenging behaviour, family/paid carers, and professionals engaged in or delivering a psychosocial intervention across the UK. Data were analysed thematically using a framework approach.
Results UNASSIGNED
Stakeholders considered therapeutic and supportive relationships and personalised care as facilitating factors of psychosocial interventions to address aggressive challenging behaviour. The operational structure of community intellectual disability services and conflicting expectations of professionals and carers were the main contextual barriers that impeded the implementation of psychosocial interventions addressing aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities.
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
Findings highlight the valued components that maximise positive change in adults with intellectual disabilities who display aggressive challenging behaviour. Several operational adjustments including referral criteria, roles of professionals and workforce issues need to be addressed in services to maximise the implementation of psychosocial interventions to reduce aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities.
The current study looked at what factors that lead to good outcomes from therapies that aim to reduce aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with learning disabilities. We also looked at the factors that may prevent positive change (

Autres résumés

Type: plain-language-summary (eng)
The current study looked at what factors that lead to good outcomes from therapies that aim to reduce aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with learning disabilities. We also looked at the factors that may prevent positive change (

Identifiants

pubmed: 37881460
doi: 10.3310/nihropenres.13437.1
pmc: PMC10593323
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

40

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2023 Kouroupa A et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

No competing interests were disclosed.

Références

J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2008 Sep;33(3):196-214
pubmed: 18752093
J Intellect Disabil. 2016 Sep;20(3):241-62
pubmed: 26483080
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Sep 18;13:117
pubmed: 24047204
J Intellect Disabil Res. 2017 Jun;61(6):604-617
pubmed: 28090687
J Ment Health Res Intellect Disabil. 2013 Oct;6(4):280-303
pubmed: 23914278
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2020 Apr;27(2):140-150
pubmed: 31538692
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2019 Sep;32(5):1203-1215
pubmed: 31066173
J Intellect Disabil. 2023 Mar;27(1):121-137
pubmed: 35086364
Mindfulness (N Y). 2020;11(1):99-111
pubmed: 32435317
Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2020 Mar;33(2):92-109
pubmed: 31743125
Res Dev Disabil. 2018 Sep;80:192-204
pubmed: 29880319
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Aug 13;19(16):
pubmed: 36011623
Res Dev Disabil. 2022 May;124:104202
pubmed: 35248813
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2023 Sep;36(5):1101-1112
pubmed: 37271584
J Clin Nurs. 2016 Apr;25(7-8):972-82
pubmed: 26868057
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2019 Mar;32(2):219-237
pubmed: 30353630
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2018 Jan;31(1):76-86
pubmed: 28120547
Front Psychol. 2016 Oct 06;7:1549
pubmed: 27766088
Res Dev Disabil. 2013 Nov;34(11):4085-102
pubmed: 24051363
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2018 Nov;31(6):983-998
pubmed: 29947444
PLoS One. 2019 Aug 22;14(8):e0221507
pubmed: 31437228
Res Dev Disabil. 2016 Oct;57:63-84
pubmed: 27394053

Auteurs

Athanasia Kouroupa (A)

Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, England, UK.

Leila Hamza (L)

Assessment and Intervention Team, Barnet Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust, London, England, UK.

Aisha Rafiq (A)

Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, England, UK.

Angela Hassiotis (A)

Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, England, UK.

Penny Rapaport (P)

Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, England, UK.

Andrew Jahoda (A)

School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.

Laurence Taggart (L)

Ulster University, Coleraine, Northern Ireland, UK.

Liz Steed (L)

Centre for Primary Care, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, England, UK.

Sally-Ann Cooper (SA)

School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.

Craig Melville (C)

School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.

Louise Marston (L)

Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, England, UK.

Rachel Royston (R)

Division of Psychiatry, Faculty of Brain Sciences, University College London, London, England, UK.

Afia Ali (A)

Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London, London, England, UK.

Classifications MeSH