TY - JOUR
T1 - ‘Stakeholders are almost always resistant’
T2 - Australian behaviour support practitioners’ perceptions of the barriers and enablers to reducing restrictive practices
AU - Leif, Erin S.
AU - Fox, Russell A.
AU - Subban, Pearl
AU - Sharma, Umesh
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank Dr Geoff Potter for helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© The British Society of Developmental Disabilities 2022.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - A restrictive practice (RP) is defined as a practice or intervention that has the effect of restricting the rights or freedom of movement of a person, and includes physical, mechanical, and chemical restraint, and seclusion. If misused or overused, RPs may present serious human rights infringements. In Australia, behaviour support practitioners who deliver behaviour support funded by the National Disability Insurance Scheme are responsible for developing positive behaviour support plans that aim to reduce and eliminate the use of RPs. At present, little is known about the barriers that behaviour support practitioners experience when attempting to reduce and eliminate the use of RPs and, conversely, what helps (or enables) them to reduce and eliminate RPs. To learn more, we conducted an online survey consisting of two open-ended questions with 109 Australian behaviour support practitioners to identify barriers and enablers. We found that fear and reluctance on the part of stakeholders were often barriers to reducing the use of RPs. However, we found that having time, funding, and resources for training, supervision, other implementation activities, care team collaboration, and data-based decision-making helped overcome barriers. We provide specific recommendations for addressing identified barriers for individual behaviour support practitioners, service provider organisations, and government and regulatory agencies.
AB - A restrictive practice (RP) is defined as a practice or intervention that has the effect of restricting the rights or freedom of movement of a person, and includes physical, mechanical, and chemical restraint, and seclusion. If misused or overused, RPs may present serious human rights infringements. In Australia, behaviour support practitioners who deliver behaviour support funded by the National Disability Insurance Scheme are responsible for developing positive behaviour support plans that aim to reduce and eliminate the use of RPs. At present, little is known about the barriers that behaviour support practitioners experience when attempting to reduce and eliminate the use of RPs and, conversely, what helps (or enables) them to reduce and eliminate RPs. To learn more, we conducted an online survey consisting of two open-ended questions with 109 Australian behaviour support practitioners to identify barriers and enablers. We found that fear and reluctance on the part of stakeholders were often barriers to reducing the use of RPs. However, we found that having time, funding, and resources for training, supervision, other implementation activities, care team collaboration, and data-based decision-making helped overcome barriers. We provide specific recommendations for addressing identified barriers for individual behaviour support practitioners, service provider organisations, and government and regulatory agencies.
KW - Positive behaviour support
KW - behaviour support practitioner
KW - restrictive practices
KW - restrictive interventions
KW - human rights
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85147328997
U2 - 10.1080/20473869.2022.2116908
DO - 10.1080/20473869.2022.2116908
M3 - Article
C2 - 36743316
AN - SCOPUS:85147328997
SN - 2047-3869
VL - 69
SP - 66
EP - 82
JO - International Journal of Developmental Disabilities
JF - International Journal of Developmental Disabilities
IS - 1
ER -