The effects of a 3 day training course in the management of aggressive behaviour in services for people with autism spectrum disorders were investigated using a quasiexperimental design. An experimental group received training over a 10-month period and a contrast group, which had received training before this study, did not. Staff training increased carer confidence, but there were no training effects of measures of staff coping, support or perceived control of challenging behaviours. Staff reports of service user challenging behaviour management difficulties decreased in both the experimental and contrast groups. This study showed that staff training can increase staff confidence in managing aggression in people with autism spectrum disorders. Staff training and aggression 3 The effects of staff training on staff confidence and challenging behavior in services for people with autism spectrum disorders. Aggressive behavior in people with mental retardation in community settings is shown by approximately 2-15% of children and adolescents and approximately 10-15% of adults (Rojahn & Tasse, 1996.) Aggression has many negative consequences, including rejection by peers, staff and family members, exclusion from integrated settings, use of restrictive behavioral practices, increased use of psychotropic medications, injuries to self, peers and staff, and increased costs (McDonell & Sturmey, 1993.) In response to this

Carers' beliefs about the controllability of challenging behaviour have been shown to be related to their emotional and behavioural responses to such behaviour. This paper describes the psychometric properties of a new 15-item scale that assesses such beliefs. The scale has good internal reliability and a two-factor structure representing positive and negative beliefs about controllability. The negative beliefs about controllability sub-scale correlate highly with a wishful-thinking coping style but not with a practical problem-solving coping style. The clinical use of this scale is discussed.

No abstract

The development of restrictive physical interventions (RPI) to manage challenging behaviours based upon control and restraint during the 1980s and 1990s led to widespread professional disquiet and campaigning to improve the policies, training and application of physical techniques. This included the promotion of a value base within which physical techniques should be used. This value base may be summarised as any use of physical interventions must be in the person's best interests, 'least restrictive' and used as the last resort following preventive strategies. The last resort principle implies that services should be able to demonstrate support plans to prevent or reduce the frequency and/or restrictiveness of PI used in individual cases. This paper proposes that adopting explicit policies and practice to reduce restrictive PI is likely to be more effective in improving quality of support as opposed to solely managing PI use. Discussion of current policy and practice is followed by discussion of organisations' roles in relation to RPI reduction, with international comparisons.

Three methods of physical restraint were videotaped and presented to two groups of subjects (undergraduate students and teenagers). Two of the methods recommended restraining a person with a learning difficulty on the ground; the other method proposed seating the individual in a chair. Subjects were asked to rate the social acceptability of the procedures using the Treatment Evaluation Inventory (TEI). Both undergraduate students and teenagers rated the chair method as more acceptable. The implications of these findings for the use of physical restraint procedures were discussed.