Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDeb, Shoumitro
dc.contributor.authorLimbu, Bharati
dc.contributor.authorNancarrow, T
dc.contributor.authorGerrard, D
dc.contributor.authorShankar, Rohit
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-20T09:36:44Z
dc.date.available2023-02-20T09:36:44Z
dc.date.issued2023-05
dc.identifier.issn1360-2322
dc.identifier.issn1468-3148
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/20423
dc.description.abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Overprescribing of off‐licence psychotropic medications, particularly antipsychotics, for challenging behaviours in people with intellectual disabilities without a psychiatric disorder is a significant public health concern. In the United Kingdom, the National Health Service England launched an initiative in 2016, ‘STopping Over‐Medication of People with learning disabilities, autism or both (STOMP)’, to address this concern. STOMP is supposed to encourage psychiatrists in the United Kingdom and elsewhere to rationalise psychotropic medication use in people with intellectual disabilities. The current study aims to gather UK psychiatrists' views and experience of implementing the STOMP initiative.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>An online questionnaire was sent to all UK psychiatrists working in the field of intellectual disabilities (estimated 225). Two open‐ended questions allowed participants to write comments in response to these questions in the free text boxes. One question asked about the challenges psychiatrists faced locally to implement STOMP, and the other asked for examples of successes and positive experiences from the process. The free text data were analysed using a qualitative method with the help of the NVivo 12 plus software.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Eighty‐eight (estimated 39%) psychiatrists returned the completed questionnaire. The qualitative analysis of free‐text data has shown variation within services in the experience and views of the psychiatrists. In areas with good support for STOMP implementation provided through adequate resources, psychiatrists reported satisfaction in the process with successful antipsychotic rationalisation, better local multi‐disciplinary and multi‐agency working, and increased awareness of STOMP issues among the stakeholders such as people with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers and multidisciplinary teams, and improved quality of life caused by reduced medication‐related adverse events in people with intellectual disabilities. However, where resource utilisation is not optimum, psychiatrists seemed dissatisfied with the process with little success in medication rationalisation.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>Whereas some psychiatrists are successful and enthusiastic about rationalising antipsychotics, others still face barriers and challenges. Much work is needed to achieve a uniformly positive outcome throughout the United Kingdom.</jats:p></jats:sec>

dc.format.extent594-603
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWiley
dc.subjectintellectual disabilities
dc.subjectpsychotropic medication
dc.subjectquestionnaire survey
dc.subjectSTOMP
dc.subjectUK psychiatrists
dc.titleThe <scp>UK</scp> psychiatrists' experience of rationalising antipsychotics in adults with intellectual disabilities: A qualitative data analysis of free‐text questionnaire responses
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000935056200001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue3
plymouth.volume36
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jar.13083
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-01-19
dc.identifier.eissn1468-3148
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1111/jar.13083
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV