Client factors as predictors of restraint and seclusion in people with intellectual disability

Restraint of adults with intellectual disabilities: A critical review of the prevalence and characteristics associated with its use

BACKGROUND

As part of their care, adults with intellectual disabilities are often subject to restrictive interventions including restraint.

METHOD

A review examining the prevalence of restraint use with people with intellectual disabilities and the characteristics associated with its use.

RESULTS

The seven papers identified used quantitative methodologies and had cross-sectional designs. Prevalence rates of restraint ranged from 11% to 78%, multiple forms of restraint were common. Most studies focused on characteristics within the person with an intellectual disability, three considered external factors. Challenging behaviour was the most consistent characteristic associated with the use of restraint, but how this was defined varied.

CONCLUSIONS

The review highlights a need for more consistent means of defining and measuring restraint and its associated characteristics. Future research into this area may also want to focus on the context of restraint such as whether it is the least restrictive option used.

Institucionalização prolongada, transtornos mentais e violência: uma revisão científica sobre o tema

Resumo Trata-se de uma revisão de literatura sobre institucionalização prolongada, transtornos mentais e violência. Uma busca sistematizada foi realizada nos principais bancos de dados e foram analisados trabalhos dos últimos 22 anos. Os resultados foram divididos em dois grupos: “Estudos relacionando fatores ligados à predição/risco de violência e institucionalização” e “Estudos relacionando risco de violência e desassistência/desinstitucionalização”. Verificou-se que a doença mental isoladamente não é fator diretamente associado ao maior risco de violência, que fatores relacionados à própria institucionalização e à assistência com privação de liberdade influenciam a predição de violência. Conclui-se que abordagens humanizadas, multiprofissionais e com equipe treinada, aliadas ao gerenciamento dos reais fatores de risco de violência, contribuirão para uma melhor assistência e menor necessidade de institucionalização.

Restraint, Restrictive Intervention, and Seclusion of People With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Restraint, restrictive interventions, and seclusion are hotly contested practices with inconclusive evidence of their effectiveness. Because the use of restraint and seclusion on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) is controversial and its effectiveness doubtable, this study was conducted to explore if and how they were permitted in Medicaid HCBS 1915(c) waivers, the largest providers of long-term services and supports (LTSS) for people with IDD. To do so, 111 fiscal year 2015 IDD waivers from across the nation were examined to determine if and how states permitted restraint, restrictive interventions, and seclusion. Findings revealed an overwhelming majority of waivers permitted the use of restraint (78.4%) and restrictive interventions (75.7%). A smaller proportion (24.3%) allowed the use of seclusion.

Apolipoprotein E ɛ4, Cognitive Function, and Pain Experience in Down Syndrome: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

The presence of apolipoprotein E (ApoE) ɛ4 allele might be related to higher pain experience due to increased risk for potentially painful physical conditions and cognitive impairment (less efficient coping with pain). This hypothesis is clinically relevant to examine in adults with Down syndrome (DS) because they are at risk for painful physical conditions, their presence of ApoE ε4 is related to cognitive impairment, and their pain experience is unclear. The present pilot study addressed the associations between ApoE genotype, cognition, and pain in DS.

METHOD

DNA analysis of saliva, neuropsychological tests (assessing memory and executive functioning), and self-reporting pain scales (in rest and after movement) were used with a cross-sectional design in 146 adults with DS (mean age 39.1 years, mild to moderate intellectual disabilities, 46% men, 30% ApoE ɛ4 carrier).

RESULTS

The difference between ApoE ɛ4 carriers and noncarriers was not statistically significant for cognitive function, pain experience, and prevalence of potentially painful conditions. Among ɛ4 carriers, the presence of potentially painful conditions was associated with worse executive functioning (p = .022, r = .39).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical implication of the results is that ApoE ɛ4 in DS may play a role in pain, although the theoretical explanation via associations with pain experience and cognition remains unclear. Further research should include a large sample of adults with DS selected on diagnosed painful conditions to obtain more insight into the possible role of ApoE genotype (and its association with cognition) in the pain experience of this target group.