The Five Accomplishments: A Framework for Obtaining Customer Feedback in a Health Service Community Learning Disability Team

Murray, George; McKenzie, Karen; Kidd, Gillian; Psychologist, Shradha LakhaniAssistant; Sinclair, Bridget

doi:10.1111/j.1468-3156.1998.tb00058.x

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were a number of limitations of the evaluation, the most obvious being the lack of input from individuals with a learning disability about the AOT. An earlier evaluation of the community learning disability service was based on the views of service users (Murray et al. 1998); however, the intellectual and communication difficulties of the majority of individuals referred to the AOT showed that a similar approach could not be used in the current study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Evaluating an assertive outreach team for supporting clients who present behaviour that challenges

McKenzie

Paterson²

2010

Brit J Learn Disabil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accessible summary• Some people with a learning disability have behaviours that are hard for services to cope with. • This study looked at a team that tried to help these people to stay in their own homes instead of having to move to a different area. • The study looked at the good things about the team and things that could be better. • We found that the team helped the services to support people in a different way, so that there were fewer behaviours which were hard to manage. SummaryThis article evaluates an assertive outreach team which aimed to help support people with a learning disability who displayed challenging behaviour in their own environment. The service was evaluated using Maxwell's Multi-dimensional Quality Evaluation Model (Maxwell 1984), which recognises that different stakeholders in a service are likely to focus on different indices of quality including effectiveness, efficiency, economy, equity, access to services, appropriateness and social acceptability. The main strengths of the team were staff skills and professionalism, whereas the most frequently cited weaknesses centred around issues of liaison, communication and the role and remit of the team.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Evaluating an assertive outreach team for supporting clients who present behaviour that challenges

McKenzie

Paterson²

2010

Brit J Learn Disabil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on a care ethical approach, unconditional care focuses on seeing the client as a person, implying that every person needs attention, trust and a feeling of freedom of choice. In this respect, the five accomplishments (Murray and Lakhani 1998 ) which constitute a value-based framework to provide support to people with ID can be helpful. For professionals to take into account three of these five aspects, i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do people with moderate intellectual disability evaluate restrictions in daily care?

Meulen

Taminiau

Hertogh

et al. 2018

International Journal of Developmental Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: One of the general articles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) focuses on the right of freedom to make one's own choices and being aware of the importance for persons with disabilities to obtain independence. People with intellectual disability (ID) are, to a greater or lesser degree, dependent on significant others, such as support staff with respect to decision making. For that reason, the UNCRPD also stresses the relevance of supportive decision making, which should be stimulated by service policies. However, support staff may find it necessary to restrict people with ID to make their own choices, for example to prevent them from harm. Since restrictions should be applied in the interest of people with ID, it is essential to examine their own perception. In this study, we have examined how people with moderate ID themselves perceive and evaluate restrictions in daily care, using a qualitative methodology. Method: Based on an extensive pilot study, we conducted interviews being close in time and place in which possible restrictions might occur. Additionally, we applied triangulation of sources. After conducting interviews with eight persons with a moderate ID, we examined their clinical files and interviewed their key workers. Qualitative analysis was carried out by two researchers, using an inductive, thematic approach. Results: Results demonstrate communality between the participating people with ID and their key workers in perception and evaluation of restrictions, in people with ID tending to comply with the applied restrictions. When the participants with ID and their key workers differ in their evaluation of applied restrictions, this appears a value based dissensus. Conclusion:To ensure that restrictions are applied in the best interest of people with ID, it is essential that staff are attentive to the wishes of people with ID, which might be based on different values. By asking people with ID about their experiences and views of the restrictions imposed on them, we hope to contribute to an ongoing and open dialogue to inform the planning and delivery of services for people with ID based on 'best interest' principles.

show abstract

“…choice, community presence, relationships, respect, and competence. Services for individuals with learning disabilities are increasingly being evaluated by these criteria (McGowan 1996;Murray et al 1998). The role of a professional working with clients with learning disabilities may therefore represent a balance between maintaining clients' behaviour within certain parameters (duty of care) and an obligation to make choices available to clients to the extent that they can make valid decisions (enabling choice).…”

Section: Enabling Client Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge of learning disabilities: the relationship with choice, duty of care and non-aversive approaches

McKenzie¹,

Murray²,

Higgon³

et al. 1999

Journal of Learning Disabilities for Nursing, Health, and Socia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examines the relationship between the knowledge of the diagnostic criteria for a learning disability (based on DSM IV criteria), care practices and experience in health care and social care staff. Responses to a questionnaire were analysed in terms of participants emphasis on: recognizing duty of care; enabling choice; non-aversive and aversive strategies. Results indicated that the knowledge of the criteria for a learning disability was limited, with only I6% of the sample correctly identifying all three criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in relation to experience or level of knowledge. No clear cut differences were found between the groups in relation to tendency to emphasize a particular management approach, with the strategies adopted appearing to be influenced by vignettes used in this study. Participants tended to give responses that identified both a recognition of their duty of care to clients and the need to enable choice. Limitations of this study are discussed. ' People are born that way' Low IQ ' Can't understand things the way we do' ' Not as clever as normal people' Impaired adaptive skills 'Need help with lots of daily tasks' ' Can't cope with everyday things' Aversive strategies ' Just let her scream for the biscuits' ' Tell him he has to wash it ' Non-aversive strategies ' Buy him five of his favourite shirts' ' Introduce her slowly to a range of foods' Duty of care ' Make sure she eats other things' ' Wash his shirt quickly each night' Enabling choice ' Buy him five shirts all the same as his favourite' ' Let her have the biscuits if she is healthy'

show abstract

The Five Accomplishments: A Framework for Obtaining Customer Feedback in a Health Service Community Learning Disability Team

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluating an assertive outreach team for supporting clients who present behaviour that challenges

Evaluating an assertive outreach team for supporting clients who present behaviour that challenges

How do people with moderate intellectual disability evaluate restrictions in daily care?

Knowledge of learning disabilities: the relationship with choice, duty of care and non-aversive approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About