Article

Community learning disability teams: perceived effectiveness, multidisciplinary working and service user satisfaction.

Institute of Nursing Research, University of Ulster, Ireland.
Journal of Intellectual Disabilities 01/2008; 11(4):329-42. DOI: 10.1177/1744629507085271
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The locus of care for people with learning disabilities has shifted from institutional/residential care to community care, with Community Learning Disability Teams (CLDTs) providing support for people with learning disabilities, and their family caregivers, in the community. A survey of the perceived effectiveness of 145 CLDT members, 27 family caregivers and 21 people with a learning disability was undertaken. Findings suggest high levels of perceived effectiveness with the services provided by the CLDTs, but caregivers gave the lowest satisfaction ratings. Although overall effectiveness was rated highly there is no room for complacency. There was limited evidence to support the view that multidisciplinary CLDTs are more effective than unidisciplinary teams. Further research is required in this area and ongoing evaluation of the effectiveness of CLDTs is suggested.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
219 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In response to rising local need and national drivers such as the Mansell Report, an isolated inpatient ward for people with an intellectual disability and additional mental health and behavioural problems was developed into a more flexible service integrating inpatient beds, day assessment, outreach and the local community learning disability teams. The functioning of the new service is evaluated on the basis of the way it was utilized in its first 2 years, and its outcomes, and compared with the pre-existing, more traditional inpatient ward. Although the new service model treated a higher number of people, it was more able to prevent or shorten inpatient admissions and to prevent placement breakdown and reduce aggressive incidents amongst inpatients during their stay. The integrated model described, whilst not being immune to the problem of delayed discharge, has in its first 2 years been a more effective, more flexible and safer service than the previous more traditional model.
    Journal of Intellectual Disabilities 03/2011; 15(1):7-19.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article describes a study that involved interviewing eight managers of residential services, who have made referrals to community learning disability teams (CLDTs) for challenging behaviour. Thematic analysis and a critical perspective are combined to analyse and interpret what referrers said about the process of the referral. The study found that managers referred people with intellectual disabilities to the CLDT primarily in order to manage organisational problems rather than to directly manage challenging behaviour. The referrals enlisted the services of professionals to legitimise the residential services, to confirm their practices and to provide credibility to existing decisions by managers. In referring a man or woman with intellectual disabilities to the CLDT, the managers submit themselves, their staff and the person with the intellectual disabilities to the power of the health and psy-complex professionals.
    Disability & Society 01/2014; 29(2). · 0.73 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Individuals with an intellectual disability often require intensive services to promote their social participation to the fullest extent. As such, measuring satisfaction with these services appears essential to enhance the quality of life of individuals with an intellectual disability and to improve service delivery within agencies. Thus, the purpose of the study was to conduct an initial validation of the Brief Assessment of Service Satisfaction in Persons with an Intellectual Disability (BASSPID), a 15-item questionnaire designed to assess service satisfaction. To examine the structure, reliability, and validity of the BASSPID, we interviewed 98 individuals with an intellectual disability and 23 parents. Overall, the BASSPID contained one scale, which had strong content and convergent validity as well as items easily understandable for individuals with an intellectual disability. Furthermore, the questionnaire had good internal consistency and adequate test-retest reliability. However, parents generally overestimated the perceived satisfaction of their child. The study suggests that the BASSPID may be useful to assess the satisfaction of individuals with an intellectual disability, but more research is needed to examine its potential impact on improving service quality.
    Research in developmental disabilities 10/2013; · 4.41 Impact Factor