Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil ; 36(4): 812-821, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37051659

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to gain more insight into autonomy of older people with intellectual disabilities in a residential care facility in making choices. METHODS: We performed a descriptive ethnographic study in a residential facility in the Netherlands for 22 persons, aged 54-89 years, with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities (IQ <70) and low social-emotional development levels. We combined participant observations and qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Based on the observations, the main themes for the interviews were established. Residents indicated to be free to make independent choices, and experienced less autonomy with regard to health issues and finances. Support staff stated that residents' level of autonomy depends on residents' characteristics, needs, preferences, the attitude of support staff and the rules of the care institution. CONCLUSION: Residents had a clear view on their autonomy in making independent choices. Support staff is mindful of preserving residents' autonomy, which in practice is limited.


Subject(s)
Intellectual Disability , Aged , Humans , Frail Elderly , Anthropology, Cultural , Residential Facilities , Attitude of Health Personnel
2.
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil ; 34(6): 1538-1548, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34060161

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how to involve people with intellectual disabilities in making decisions about treatment and care in their palliative phase. We aimed to reach a consensus about a shared decision-making (SDM) conversation aid for people with intellectual disabilities, relatives, and healthcare professionals. METHODS: In a Delphi process, an expert panel of 11 people with intellectual disabilities, 14 relatives, and 65 healthcare professionals completed online questionnaires about the relevance and feasibility of a draft conversation aid. RESULTS: In Round 1, components were rated as (very) relevant by 70-98% of participants (M = 87%). In Round 2, after amending the aid in response to feedback, relevance ratings were 67-97% (M = 90%) and feasibility ratings 66-86% (M = 77%). The final version consists of four themes: who are you; illness/end-of-life; making decisions; and evaluating the decision. CONCLUSION: The consensus-based conversation aid is considered sufficiently relevant and feasible to be implemented in practice.


Subject(s)
Intellectual Disability , Consensus , Decision Making , Decision Making, Shared , Humans , Palliative Care
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...