Factors facilitating or hindering meaningful staff-client interactions in people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour: A systematic mixed studies review using thematic synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Interactions with professional caregivers affect the quality of support and life of people with intellectual disabilities and contribute to the occurrence of challenging behaviour. The present literature review provides an overview of factors facilitating or hindering meaningful staff-client interactions in people with borderline to profound intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour. METHOD: Database searches, reference list and citation screening, and expert consultations were undertaken. A thematic synthesis of 28 studies was performed. RESULTS: Factors were identified at the client (i.e. behaviour, emotions and (dis)abilities), staff (i.e. interactive principles, knowledge, psychological resources, attributions, attitudes and (coping with) emotions) and context levels (i.e. group size, team and organization). CONCLUSIONS: The present overview provides insights into factors that facilitate or hinder meaningful staff-client interactions with people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour. The results support the need to combine client, staff and contextual factors when considering staff-client interactions in research and practice.

The analysis of challenging relations: influences on interactive behaviour of staff towards clients with intellectual disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Relationships between support staff and clients with intellectual disability (ID) are important for quality of care, especially when dealing with challenging behaviour. Building upon an interpersonal model, this study investigates the influence of client challenging behaviour, staff attitude and staff emotional intelligence on interactive behaviour of one of these relationship partners, being support staff. METHOD: A total of 158 support staff members completed a questionnaire on staff interactive behaviour for 158 clients with ID and challenging behaviour, as well as two questionnaires on staff interpersonal attitude and emotional intelligence. RESULTS: Confronted with challenging behaviour as opposed to no challenging behaviour, staff reported less friendly, more assertive control and less support-seeking interpersonal behaviour. Also, staff used more proactive thinking and more self-reflection in dealing with challenging behaviour. Staff interpersonal attitude in general, mainly a harsh-dominant-resentful attitude, had a significant influence on most staff interactive behaviours towards an individual client with challenging behaviour. The influence of staff emotional intelligence, specifically intrapersonal abilities, on staff interactive behaviour towards an individual client with challenging behaviour was somewhat limited. CONCLUSIONS: This research supports the necessity for training staff in general interpersonal attitudes towards clients as well as training in intrapersonal emotional intelligence, when confronted with challenging behaviour. Future research should focus more on the bidirectional dynamics of staff and client interactions.

The relation between intrapersonal and interpersonal staff behaviour towards clients with ID and challenging behaviour: a validation study of the Staff-Client Interactive Behaviour Inventory.

BACKGROUND: Interpersonal staff behaviour is one of the instigating factors associated with challenging behaviour in clients with intellectual disabilities (ID). There are several studies focusing on the influence of intrapersonal staff characteristics - such as beliefs, attributions and emotional reactions - on staff behaviour. Little is known, however, about interpersonal staff behaviour itself. This study describes the development and validation of the Staff-Client Interactive Behaviour Inventory (SCIBI), measuring both intrapersonal and interpersonal staff behaviour in response to challenging behaviour in clients with ID. METHOD: A total of 292 staff members, employed in residential and community services, completed the SCIBI for 34 clients with ID and challenging behaviour. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis of a seven-factor model - with assertive control, hostile, friendly and support-seeking interpersonal behaviour; proactive thinking; self-reflection; and critical expressed emotion as reliable factors - showed an exact fit to the data, indicating construct validity and reliability of the SCIBI. A series of multilevel regression analyses showed higher age of the client to be negatively associated with assertive control. Job experience, level of education, type and sex of staff predicted interpersonal behaviour. Also, intrapersonal staff behaviour, including critical expressed emotion, proactive thinking and self-reflection, predicted interpersonal behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: The SCIBI can be used to identify staff intrapersonal and interpersonal behaviour towards clients with ID and challenging behaviour. Results obtained with the SCIBI can provide new directions for individual client treatment plans and staff training programmes.