Service provision in Scotland for people with an intellectual disability and dementia: adherence to good practice guidelines
Intended for healthcare professionals
Evidence & Practice    

Service provision in Scotland for people with an intellectual disability and dementia: adherence to good practice guidelines

Karen McKenzie Clinical psychologist, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, England
Dale Metcalfe PhD student, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, England
George Murray Chartered clinical psychologist, NHS Lothian Learning Disability Service, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Scotland;
Amanda Michie Clinical psychologist, NHS Lothian, Newcastle upon Tyne, England

Aim Good practice guidelines aim to promote equity and quality in service provision to improve the outcomes, experiences and quality of life for service users. The aim of the study was to evaluate the extent to which the practices of NHS services in Scotland for people with an intellectual disability and dementia are consistent with a range of quality indicators that cover screening, assessment and intervention.

Method Staff from ten intellectual disability services in Scotland completed an online survey rating the extent to which their service met quality indicators adapted from the British Psychological Society, Division of Clinical Psychology, Royal College of Psychiatrists’ Good Practice Standards-Self-Assessment Checklist.

Results Areas most commonly ‘fully met’ related to assessment and diagnosis and those most commonly ‘not/only partially met’ related to areas, such as flexible funding, service development and monitoring and location of out-of-area placements.

Conclusion There is disparity in the extent to which the participating services have practices that are consistent with the quality indicators.

Learning Disability Practice. 22, 2, 26-33. doi: 10.7748/ldp.2019.e1968

Correspondence

drgcmurray@gmail.com

Peer review

This article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated software

Conflict of interest

None declared

Permission

To reuse this article or for information about reprints and permissions, please contact permissions@rcni.com

Write for us

For information about writing for RCNi journals, contact writeforus@rcni.com

For author guidelines, go to rcni.com/writeforus

Want to read more?

RCNi-Plus
Already have access? Log in

or

3-month trial offer for £5.25/month

Subscribe today and save 50% on your first three months
RCNi Plus users have full access to the following benefits:
  • Unlimited access to all 10 RCNi Journals
  • RCNi Learning featuring over 175 modules to easily earn CPD time
  • NMC-compliant RCNi Revalidation Portfolio to stay on track with your progress
  • Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests
  • A customisable dashboard with over 200 topics
Subscribe

Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now


Are you a student? Our student subscription has content especially for you.
Find out more