‘Lots of Black people are on meds because they're seen as aggressive’: STOMP, COVID-19 and anti-racism in community learning disability services

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL British Journal of Learning Disabilities Pub Date : 2023-06-21 DOI:10.1111/bld.12541
Ryan Holmes, Lucy Kearney, Sheetal Gopal, Inderpal Daddi
{"title":"‘Lots of Black people are on meds because they're seen as aggressive’: STOMP, COVID-19 and anti-racism in community learning disability services","authors":"Ryan Holmes,&nbsp;Lucy Kearney,&nbsp;Sheetal Gopal,&nbsp;Inderpal Daddi","doi":"10.1111/bld.12541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The STOMP agenda (Stopping Over-Medication of People with learning disabilities, autism, or both) drew focus to individuals with a diagnosis of a learning disability being prescribed psychotropic medication to manage ‘behaviours that challenge’. The following study is an audit of two community learning disability services in the London boroughs of Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea for compliance with national guidance on the use of medication in this population, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and equality, diversity and anti-racism.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Routinely collected data were audited relating to clients identified in each service, totalling 54 participants. Data were audited against five standards: minimum effective dose, medication reviews, alternative multidisciplinary input, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and equality, diversity and anti–racism. Comparisons were made to the overall caseload (<i>N</i> = 365) where appropriate.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Evidence demonstrated a greater risk of receiving psychotropic medication to manage behaviours that challenge for service users from racialised backgrounds, further evidencing institutional and/or individualised racism within practice for this population. Prescriptions also increased in dosage during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated by insufficient provision of alternative input and regular multi-disciplinary review as required by national guidance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Community learning disability teams require dedicated, co-produced STOMP pathways to review those at risk of over-medication. Additional research is required to explore individual and systemic factors contributing to ethnic disparities in medication prescription for behaviours that challenge among people with learning disabilities. Further recommendations are considered around developing data collection, service user involvement, and future directions.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47232,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"52 1","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bld.12541","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bld.12541","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The STOMP agenda (Stopping Over-Medication of People with learning disabilities, autism, or both) drew focus to individuals with a diagnosis of a learning disability being prescribed psychotropic medication to manage ‘behaviours that challenge’. The following study is an audit of two community learning disability services in the London boroughs of Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea for compliance with national guidance on the use of medication in this population, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and equality, diversity and anti-racism.

Method

Routinely collected data were audited relating to clients identified in each service, totalling 54 participants. Data were audited against five standards: minimum effective dose, medication reviews, alternative multidisciplinary input, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and equality, diversity and anti–racism. Comparisons were made to the overall caseload (N = 365) where appropriate.

Results

Evidence demonstrated a greater risk of receiving psychotropic medication to manage behaviours that challenge for service users from racialised backgrounds, further evidencing institutional and/or individualised racism within practice for this population. Prescriptions also increased in dosage during the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated by insufficient provision of alternative input and regular multi-disciplinary review as required by national guidance.

Conclusions

Community learning disability teams require dedicated, co-produced STOMP pathways to review those at risk of over-medication. Additional research is required to explore individual and systemic factors contributing to ethnic disparities in medication prescription for behaviours that challenge among people with learning disabilities. Further recommendations are considered around developing data collection, service user involvement, and future directions.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“很多黑人因为被视为好斗而服用药物”:STOMP、COVID-19和社区学习障碍服务中的反种族主义
背景 STOMP 议程(停止对有学习障碍、自闭症或两者兼有者的过度用药)将人们的注意力吸引到了被诊断为有学习障碍的人被开具精神药物以控制 "挑战行为 "的问题上。下面的研究是对伦敦威斯敏斯特区和肯辛顿与切尔西区的两家社区学习障碍服务机构进行的审计,以了解这两家机构是否遵守了有关该群体用药、COVID-19 大流行病的影响以及平等、多样性和反种族主义的国家指导原则。 方法 对常规收集的数据进行审核,这些数据与每个服务机构确定的客户有关,共有 54 名参与者。数据审核依据五项标准:最低有效剂量、用药审查、替代性多学科投入、COVID-19 大流行的影响以及平等、多样性和反种族主义。在适当的情况下,将其与总体案例数(N = 365)进行比较。 结果 有证据表明,具有种族背景的服务对象接受精神药物治疗以控制挑战行为的风险更大,这进一步证明了针对这一人群的机构和/或个人化种族主义做法。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,处方药的剂量也有所增加,但由于没有按照国家指南的要求提供足够的替代投入和定期的多学科审查,情况更加严重。 结论 社区学习障碍团队需要专门的、共同制定的 STOMP 途径来审查那些有过度用药风险的患者。还需要开展更多研究,探索导致学习障碍者在针对挑战行为的用药处方方面存在种族差异的个人和系统性因素。围绕数据收集的发展、服务使用者的参与和未来发展方向,我们还考虑了进一步的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
20.00%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Learning Disabilities is an interdisciplinary international peer-reviewed journal which aims to be the leading journal in the learning disability field. It is the official Journal of the British Institute of Learning Disabilities. It encompasses contemporary debate/s and developments in research, policy and practice that are relevant to the field of learning disabilities. It publishes original refereed papers, regular special issues giving comprehensive coverage to specific subject areas, and especially commissioned keynote reviews on major topics. In addition, there are reviews of books and training materials, and a letters section. The focus of the journal is on practical issues, with current debates and research reports. Topics covered could include, but not be limited to: Current trends in residential and day-care service Inclusion, rehabilitation and quality of life Education and training Historical and inclusive pieces [particularly welcomed are those co-written with people with learning disabilities] Therapies Mental health issues Employment and occupation Recreation and leisure; Ethical issues, advocacy and rights Family and carers Health issues Adoption and fostering Causation and management of specific syndromes Staff training New technology Policy critique and impact.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information What Approaches Described in Research Literature Enhance the Engagement of Children and Young People With Severe or Profound and Multiple Learning Disabilities? A Systematic Literature Review Staff Perceptions of Mental Health Relapse Prevention Support in a Specialist Mental Health Service in an Intellectual Disability Setting Item reduction of the “Support Intensity Scale” for people with intellectual disabilities, using machine learning Culturally adaptive healthcare for people with a learning disability from an ethnic minority background: A qualitative synthesis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1