Overcoming the barriers experienced in conducting a medication trial in adults with aggressive challenging behaviour and intellectual disabilities

Background  Aggressive challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disability (ID) is frequently treated with antipsychotic drugs, despite a limited evidence base. Method  A multi‐centre randomised controlled trial was undertaken to investigate the efficacy, adverse effects and costs of two co...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of intellectual disability research 2010-01, Vol.54 (1), p.17-25
Hauptverfasser: Oliver-Africano, P., Dickens, S., Ahmed, Z., Bouras, N., Cooray, S., Deb, S., Knapp, M., Hare, M., Meade, M., Reece, B., Bhaumik, S., Harley, D., Piachaud, J., Regan, A., Ade Thomas, D., Karatela, S., Rao, B., Dzendrowskyj, T., Lenôtre, L., Watson, J., Tyrer, P.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background  Aggressive challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disability (ID) is frequently treated with antipsychotic drugs, despite a limited evidence base. Method  A multi‐centre randomised controlled trial was undertaken to investigate the efficacy, adverse effects and costs of two commonly prescribed antipsychotic drugs (risperidone and haloperidol) and placebo. Results  The trial faced significant problems in recruitment. The intent was to recruit 120 patients over 2 years in three centres and to use a validated aggression scale (Modified Overt Aggression Scale) score as the primary outcome. Despite doubling the period of recruitment, only 86 patients were ultimately recruited. Conclusions  Variation in beliefs over the efficacy of drug treatment, difficulties within multidisciplinary teams and perceived ethical concerns over medication trials in this population all contributed to poor recruitment. Where appropriate to the research question cluster randomised trials represent an ethically and logistically feasible alternative to individually randomised trials.
ISSN:0964-2633
1365-2788
DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2009.01195.x