Complex interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disability: a rapid realist review informed by multiple populations
Royston, R.; Naughton, S.; Hassiotis, A.; Jahoda, A.; Ali, A.; Chauhan, U.; Cooper, S.-A.; Kouroupa, A.; Steed, L.; Strydom, A.; Taggart, L.; Rapaport, P.
Show abstract
ObjectivesApproximately 10% of people with intellectual disability display aggressive challenging behaviour, usually due to unmet needs. There are a variety of interventions available, yet a scarcity of understanding about what mechanisms contribute to successful interventions. We explored how complex interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour work in practice and what works for whom by developing programme theories through contexts-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. MethodsThis review followed modified rapid realist review methodology and RAMESES-II standards. Eligible papers reported on a range of population groups (intellectual disability, mental health, dementia, young people and adults) and settings (community and inpatient) to broaden the scope and available data for review. ResultsFive databases and grey literature were searched and a total of 59 studies were included. We developed three overarching domains comprising of 11 CMOs; 1. Working with the person displaying aggressive challenging behaviour, 2. Relationships and team focused approaches and 3. Sustaining and embedding facilitating factors at team and systems levels. Mechanisms underlying the successful application of interventions included improving understanding, addressing unmet need, developing positive skills, enhancing carer compassion and boosting staff self-efficacy and motivation. ConclusionThe review emphasises how interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour should be personalised and tailored to suit individual needs. Effective communication and trusting relationships between service users, carers, professionals, and within staff teams is essential to facilitate effective intervention delivery. Carer inclusion and service level buy-in supports the attainment of desired outcomes. Implications for policy, clinical practice and future directions are discussed. Prospero Registration NumberCRD42020203055.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementing an Advance Choice Documents resource for Black African and Caribbean people with experience of compulsory psychiatric admission 96%
- Service user perspectives of community mental health services for people with complex emotional needs: a co-produced qualitative interview study 95%
- Clinician views on best practice community care for people with complex emotional needs and how it can be achieved: a qualitative study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinician perspectives on what constitutes good practice in community services for people with Complex Emotional Needs: A qualitative thematic meta-synthesis 96%
- Service user experiences of community services for Complex Emotional Needs: A qualitative thematic synthesis 96%
- Service user experiences and views regarding telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a co-produced framework analysis 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review 95%
- A qualitative investigation of crisis cafés in England: their role, implementation, and accessibility 95%
- ‘Beyond Places of Safety’ – a qualitative study exploring the implementation of mental health crisis care innovations across England 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Process Evaluation of APPLE-Tree (Active Prevention in People at risk of dementia through Lifestyle bEhaviour Change and Technology to build REsiliEnce), a Dementia-Prevention Study focused on Health and Lifestyle changes 94%
- ‘I had no life. I was only existing’ . Factors shaping the mental health and wellbeing of people experiencing long Covid: a qualitative study 94%
- Effectiveness, acceptability and potential harms of peer support for self-harm in non-clinical settings: A systematic review 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Exploring High Mortality Rates Among People With Multiple And Complex Needs: A Qualitative Study Using Peer Research Methods 95%
- The psychosocial impact on frontline health and social care professionals in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study 94%
- Synthesizing evidence regarding community-based volunteer facilitated programs supporting integrated care transitions from hospital to home: A scoping review protocol 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.