Urinary continence promotion and people with an intellectual disability
Intended for healthcare professionals
Evidence and practice    

Urinary continence promotion and people with an intellectual disability

Paul Keenan Assistant professor, University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
Sandra Fleming Assistant professor, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Paul Horan Assistant professor, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Kathleen Byrne Clinical tutor, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Eilish Burke Ussher assistant professor, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Michelle Cleary Teaching fellow, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Carmel Doyle Assistant professor, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
Colin Griffiths Assistant professor, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland

Continence is regarded as a basic need and many continence problems can be addressed and managed effectively. People with an intellectual disability (ID) are at greater risk of developing urinary incontinence (UI), however action to address their needs is minimal and the quality of care they receive varies despite national care standards and guidelines. This article examines promotion of continence in people with an ID and explores the literature on assessment and management of need. It also discusses the factors ID nurses should consider when meeting the continence needs of people with an ID, including explaining important terms, and assessing and managing UI and continence promotion, as well as their role in providing care and support in a person-centred and inter-professional context.

Learning Disability Practice. doi: 10.7748/ldp.2018.e1878

Citation

Keenan P, Fleming S, Horan P et al (2018) Urinary continence promotion and people with an intellectual disability. Learning Disability Practice. doi: 10.7748/ldp.2018.e1878

Peer review

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

Correspondence

paul.keenan@tcd.ie

Conflict of interest

None declared

Published online: 18 May 2018

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