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

Barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Underrepresentation of disabled groups in clinical trials results in an inadequate evidence base for their clinical care, which drives health inequalities. This study aims to review and map the potential barriers and facilitators to the recruitment of disabled people in clinical trials to identify knowledge gaps and areas for further extensive research. The review addresses the question: 'What are the barriers and facilitators to recruitment of disabled people to clinical trials?'.

METHODS

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping review guidelines were followed to complete the current scoping review. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched via Ovid. The literature search was guided by a combination of four key concepts from the research question: (1) disabled populations, (2) patient recruitment, (3) barriers and facilitators, and (4) clinical trials. Papers discussing barriers and facilitators of all types were included. Papers that did not have at least one disabled group as their population were excluded. Data on study characteristics and identified barriers and facilitators were extracted. Identified barriers and facilitators were then synthesised according to common themes.

RESULTS

The review included 56 eligible papers. The evidence on barriers and facilitators was largely sourced from Short Communications from Researcher Perspectives (N = 22) and Primary Quantitative Research (N = 17). Carer perspectives were rarely represented in articles. The most common disability types for the population of interest in the literature were neurological and psychiatric disabilities. A total of five emergent themes were determined across the barriers and facilitators. These were as follows: risk vs benefit assessment, design and management of recruitment protocol, balancing internal and external validity considerations, consent and ethics, and systemic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Both barriers and facilitators were often highly specific to disability type and context. Assumptions should be minimised, and study design should prioritise principles of co-design and be informed by a data-driven assessment of needs for the study population. Person-centred approaches to consent that empower disabled people to exercise their right to choose should be adopted in inclusive practice. Implementing these recommendations stands to improve inclusive practices in clinical trial research, serving to produce a well-rounded and comprehensive evidence base.

Dietary supplements for aggressive behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities: A randomised controlled crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Aggressive incidents are common in people with intellectual disabilities. Therefore, we aimed to assess whether supplementation of multivitamins, minerals, and omega-3 fatty acids (FA) reduces aggressive incidents.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised, triple blind, placebo controlled, single crossover intervention trial. People with intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning, between 12 and 40 years of age, and showing aggressive behaviour were included. Participants received either a daily dose of dietary supplements, or placebo. Primary outcome was the number of aggressive incidents, measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS).

RESULTS

there were 113 participants (placebo, n = 56), of whom 24 (placebo, n = 10) participated in the crossover phase of the trial. All 137 trajectories were included in the analyses. There was no significant difference in mean number of aggressive incidents per day between those assigned to supplements and those who received placebo (rate ratio = 0.93: 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.59-1.45).

CONCLUSION

In this pragmatic trial, we did not find significant differences in the outcomes between the supplement and placebo arms. The COVID-19 pandemic started midway through our trial, this may have affected the results.

Pharmacological management of psychopathology in people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism spectrum disorder

On average, 49–63% of people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are prescribed psychotropic medications to treat psychopathology, including psychiatric illness, behaviours that challenge and the core symptoms and associated behaviours of these developmental disorders. In many cases, psychotropics, particularly antipsychotics, are used off-label without a proper indication, particularly to manage behaviours that challenge. The RCTs show moderate evidence supporting the efficacy of low-dose risperidone and some preliminary evidence for aripiprazole in treating behaviours that challenge among children with ASD and/or intellectual disabilities. The RCT-based evidence for the other psychotropics is equivocal, so no definitive conclusions can be made on their efficacy. Polypharmacy and the use of high doses of antipsychotics are prevalent in this population, leading to the risk of adverse events and drug–drug interactions. Despite various national and international guidelines, and government initiatives encouraging reduced psychotropic use, there is little evidence of this happening; on the contrary, the use of antidepressants, mood stabilisers and benzodiazepines may be increasing. A concerted multi-agency effort is urgently needed to address this significant public health concern of the overmedication of people with intellectual disabilities and/or ASD.

Expanding capacity in mental health research in intellectual disabilities

Although the research base on mental health in intellectual disabilities is advancing, there are long-standing barriers that hinder successful completion of funded studies. A variety of stakeholders hold the key to mitigating the challenges and arriving at sustainable solutions that involve researchers, experts by experience, clinicians and many others in the research pathway. Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic can also contribute to improvements in the conduct of research in the medium to long term. People with an intellectual disability and mental health conditions deserve high standards of evidence-based care.

One-to-one volunteer befriending to reduce symptoms of depression in people with intellectual disability: a feasibility RCT

Background

Little is known about the effectiveness of befriending for people with intellectual disability and whether or not befriending improves depressive symptoms and social outcomes.

Objective

This pilot trial aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a future full-scale randomised controlled trial of one-to-one befriending for people with intellectual disability who had depressive symptoms.

Design

This was a parallel-group, two-armed randomised controlled trial incorporating an exploratory economic analysis and a mixed-methods process evaluation. Outcome assessments were conducted at baseline and at 6 months post randomisation by a research assistant who was blind to allocation. We aimed to approach 50 participants, with a view to recruiting 40.

Setting

Participants with intellectual disability were recruited from one NHS trust and from referrals to two community befriending services. The intervention was delivered by community befriending services.

Participants

Adults with mild or moderate intellectual disability with a score on the Glasgow Depression Scale for people with a Learning Disability of ≥ 5 were included. Those attending a day service/college for ≥ 3 days a week were excluded. Volunteers were aged ≥ 18 years and had no history of prior convictions.

Intervention

Participants in the intervention group were matched with a volunteer befriender and were expected to meet once per week for 1 hour, over 6 months. Volunteers recorded activities in a logbook. Volunteers received training and regular supervision. Both groups received usual care and a resource booklet of local activities.

Main outcome measures

The feasibility outcomes and progression criteria were recruitment of at least 70% of participants approached; matching of at least 70% of participants in the intervention group to a volunteer; a dropout rate of < 30% of participants and volunteers; adherence to the intervention (10 meetings between pairs); acceptability of the intervention; and feasibility of collecting data on costs and resource use for an economic evaluation. Changes in depressive symptoms (primary clinical outcome: Glasgow Depression Scale) and self-esteem, quality of life, social participation, social support, health-related quality of life and service use were recorded at 6 months. Outcomes in volunteers were also assessed.

Results

We recruited only 16 participants with intellectual disability (40% of target) and 10 volunteers. Six of the eight (75%) participants in the intervention group were matched with a befriender and there was good adherence (mean number of meetings attended 11.8; range 1–21 meetings). Going to a cafe/restaurant and having a conversation were the most frequent activities. All participants were retained at follow-up, but two volunteers dropped out. Trial procedures and the intervention might be acceptable, but modifications were suggested. Data on costs and resource use were obtained, but there were discrepancies in the health-related quality-of-life data.

Limitations

Delays to the study prevented the use of alternative recruitment strategies and the planned 12-month follow-up could not be completed.

Conclusions

Recruitment was not feasible, but other feasibility outcomes were more positive.

Future work

Evaluating befriending for people with intellectual disability could be explored through alternative study designs, such as observational studies.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN63779614.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 9, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Psychotropic medication use for adults and older adults with intellectual disability; selective review, recommendations and future directions

A growing expert consensus has emerged to guide prescribing behavior and monitoring of psychotropic medications in adults and older adults with intellectual disability (ID). However, there is little empirically-derived evidence to inform physician selection of specific categories of psychotropic medication for treatment of "challenging" behaviors in this vulnerable population (such as aggression to self, others and objects; self-injurious behaviors; repetitive stereotypic behaviors; and hyperactivity). Difficulties with application of formal definitional diagnostic criteria and reliable assignment of psychiatric diagnoses to adults with ID, which is often difficult due to their poor communication skills, contribute to confusion and uncertainty surrounding medication selection. Long-term administration of antipsychotic medications are commonly prescribed for challenging behaviors in spite of their questionable long-term efficacy, leading some to suggest that their "episodic" short-term administration for imminent dangerousness to self and others or when difficult-to-find residential placements are threatened is preferred to their long-term administration. Further, literature supports engagement of interdisciplinary treatment teams to seek causes for challenging behaviors, formulate non-pharmacological psychosocial and behavioral plans for their amelioration and, if medications are initiated, convene regular medication monitoring to identify "drug-related problems". Medication monitoring is important because medication-related adverse events cause or contribute to challenging behaviors, which can sometimes be improved by dose reduction, medication discontinuation and/or elimination of polypharmacy and co-pharmacy. Importantly, medications themselves may interfere with self-reported measures of Quality of Life. The data clearly highlight the need for well-designed randomized controlled clinical trials in samples that are homogeneous with respect to severity of ID and residential setting; moreover, they should include a wider variety of clinical and safety outcome measures. Preclinical studies have suggested novel pharmacological strategies to prevent progressive worsening of adaptive function in adults with Down syndrome in particular, and improvement of cognition in adults with ID in general, irrespective of the etiopathogenesis of the ID. Translational clinical trials to address pathogenic mechanisms of ID, as well as challenging behaviors, are anticipated but raise societal issues pertaining to protection of this vulnerable population enrolling in clinical trials and prioritization of urgent therapeutic targets (e.g., amelioration of challenging behaviors versus improving or preserving intellectual functioning).

Challenges to conducting randomised controlled trials with adults with intellectual disabilities: Experiences of international experts

BACKGROUND

Globally, conducting randomised controlled trials can be a complex endeavour. The complexity increases when including participants with cognitive or intellectual disabilities. A fuller understanding of the barriers and challenges that can be expected in such trials may help researchers to make their trials more inclusive for people with disabilities.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve international trial experts.

RESULTS

Eight themes emerged relating to challenges linked to: 1) participant co-morbidities, 2) participant ability levels, 3) ethics and consent, 4) the RCT methodology, 5) gatekeeping, 6) staff turnover, 7) lack of technical understanding and 8) attitudes and perceptions.

CONCLUSION

Conducting trials with cognitively disabled participants can pose unique challenges although many can be overcome with 'reasonable adjustments'. Challenges that are harder to overcome are attitudes and perceptions that people (professional staff, funding bodies, carers or fellow researchers) hold towards the utility of conducting trials with cognitively disabled populations.

Facilitating individuals and families affected by fragile X syndrome to participate in medication trials

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been an increasing number of trials of medications for fragile X syndrome (FXS). In order to be adequately powered, trials have involved many centres around the world with relatively small numbers of participants recruited at each site. This study aims to understand the barriers to, and how best to facilitate participation in, medication trials in order to improve recruitment and the experience of participants with FXS.

METHODS

A mixed methods design was used to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. Participants were invited to participate through the UK Fragile X Society, a local mailing list and through social media. Those who agreed to participate completed a quantitative questionnaire and indicated whether they would be willing to participate in a follow-up focus group.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 328 individuals who either had FXS, or were a parent, carer or family member of an individual with FXS. Over two-thirds of participants reported concern about side effects, while over one-third mentioned swallowing tablets, blood tests, financial aspects and travel as barriers to participation. Focus groups with 12 individuals highlighted themes of trial challenges, strategies to overcome these and motivating factors to participate.

CONCLUSIONS

Many of the factors, which potentially negatively influence participation in a clinical trial for FXS, could be mitigated in relatively simple ways. Easily accessible information, particularly about safety issues, the research team and the trial environment should be standard practice. Desensitisation programmes for blood testing, provision of different preparations of medication (e.g. liquid) and use of a combination of local, remote and site visits to reduce travel and time should also be considered.

Interest in Research Participation Among Caregivers of Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders

The goal of this study was to examine caregiver agreement to hear about local research opportunities by joining a clinical research registry. Data from this cross-sectional study were gathered, between 2014 and 2017, across two outpatient clinics: (1) a multidisciplinary Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) clinic (N = 5228) and (2) a general psychology clinic serving youth with, or at risk for, a neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD; N = 5040). Overall, more than 8 in 10 caregivers agreed to join the registry. Several child clinical characteristics, as well as racial and sociodemographic factors, were predictive of parental agreement. Findings suggest caregivers of youth with ASD and NDD are amenable to joining the local research enterprise, however further work is needed to understand why some caregivers decline.

A structured programme to withdraw antipsychotics among adults with intellectual disabilities: The Cornwall experience

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications are used among 19%-58% of adults with intellectual disabilities to manage challenging behaviour against the NICE guideline recommendations. Studies show that it is possible to completely withdraw antipsychotics in about one third of adults with intellectual disabilities and a dose reduction of 50% or more in another third.

METHOD

In Cornwall, over three years the present authors developed a structured pathway to withdraw antipsychotics among adults with intellectual disabilities which involved people with intellectual disabilities and their carers, GPs, community learning disability team members and pharmacists.

RESULTS

The present authors managed to withdraw antipsychotics totally among 46.5% (33/71) and reduced over 50% of dosage in another 11.3% (8/71) of adults with intellectual disabilities. At three months follow-up no one required hospital admission or change in placement.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to withdraw/reduce antipsychotics in a high proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities if a concerted effort is made involving all stakeholders from the outset.

Behavioural activation versus guided self-help for depression in adults with learning disabilities: the BeatIt RCT

BACKGROUND

Depression is the most prevalent mental health problem among people with learning disabilities.

OBJECTIVE

The trial investigated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural activation for depression experienced by people with mild to moderate learning disabilities. The intervention was compared with a guided self-help intervention.

DESIGN

A multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial, with follow-up at 4, 8 and 12 months post randomisation. There was a nested qualitative study.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from community learning disability teams and services and from Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services in Scotland, England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were aged ≥ 18 years, with clinically significant depression, assessed using the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychiatric Disorders for use with Adults with Learning Disabilities. Participants had to be able to give informed consent and a supporter could accompany them to therapy.

INTERVENTIONS

BeatIt was a manualised behavioural activation intervention, adapted for people with learning disabilities and depression. StepUp was an adapted guided self-help intervention.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the Glasgow Depression Scale for people with a Learning Disability (GDS-LD). Secondary outcomes included carer ratings of depressive symptoms and aggressiveness, self-reporting of anxiety symptoms, social support, activity and adaptive behaviour, relationships, quality of life (QoL) and life events, and resource and medication use.

RESULTS

There were 161 participants randomised (BeatIt, n = 84; StepUp, n = 77). Participant retention was strong, with 141 completing the trial. Most completed therapy (BeatIt: 86%; StepUp: 82%). At baseline, 63% of BeatIt participants and 66% of StepUp participants were prescribed antidepressants. There was no statistically significant difference in GDS-LD scores between the StepUp (12.94 points) and BeatIt (11.91 points) groups at the 12-month primary outcome point. However, both groups improved during the trial. Other psychological and QoL outcomes followed a similar pattern. There were no treatment group differences, but there was improvement in both groups. There was no economic evidence suggesting that BeatIt may be more cost-effective than StepUp. However, treatment costs for both groups were approximately only 4-6.5% of the total support costs. Results of the qualitative research with participants, supporters and therapists were in concert with the quantitative findings. Both treatments were perceived as active interventions and were valued in terms of their structure, content and perceived impact.

LIMITATIONS

A significant limitation was the absence of a treatment-as-usual (TAU) comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary and secondary outcomes, economic data and qualitative results all clearly demonstrate that there was no evidence for BeatIt being more effective than StepUp.

FUTURE WORK

Comparisons against TAU are required to determine whether or not these interventions had any effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN09753005.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 53. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Aggression Following Traumatic brain injury: Effectiveness of Risperidone (AFTER): study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major public health concern and many people develop long-lasting physical and neuropsychiatric consequences following a TBI. Despite the emphasis on physical rehabilitation, it is the emotional and behavioural consequences that have greater impact on people with TBI and their families. One such problem behaviour is aggression which can be directed towards others, towards property or towards the self. Aggression is reported to be common after TBI (37-71%) and causes major stress for patients and their families. Both drug and non-drug interventions are used to manage this challenging behaviour, but the evidence-base for these interventions is poor and no drugs are currently licensed for the treatment of aggression following TBI. The most commonly used drugs for this purpose are antipsychotics, particularly second-generation drugs such as risperidone. Despite this widespread use, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antipsychotic drugs, including risperidone, have not been conducted. We have, therefore, set out to test the feasibility of conducting an RCT of this drug for people who have aggressive behaviour following TBI.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will examine the feasibility of conducting a placebo-controlled, double-blind RCT of risperidone for the management of aggression in adults with TBI and also assess participants' views about their experience of taking part in the study. We will randomise 50 TBI patients from secondary care services in four centres in London and Kent to up to 4 mg of risperidone orally or an inert placebo and follow them up 12 weeks later. Participants will be randomised to active or control treatment in a 1:1 ratio via an external and remote web-based randomisation service. Participants will be assessed at baseline and 12-week follow-up using a battery of assessment scales to measure changes in aggressive behaviour (MOAS, IRQ) as well as global functioning (GOS-E, CGI), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, SF-12) and mental health (HADS). We will also assess the adverse effect profile with a standard scale (UKU) and collect available data from medical records on blood tests (serum glucose/HbA1c, lipid profile, prolactin), and check body weight and blood pressure. In addition completion of the MOAS and a check for any new or worsening side-effect will be completed weekly and used by the prescribing clinician to determine continuing dosage. Family carers' wellbeing will be assessed with CWSQ. Service use will be recorded using CSRI. A process evaluation will be carried out at the end of the trial using both qualitative and quantitative methodology.

DISCUSSION

Aggressive behaviour causes immense distress among some people with TBI and their families. By examining the feasibility of a double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT, we aim to discover whether this approach can successfully be used to test the effects of risperidone for the treatment of aggressive behaviour among people with aggression following TBI and improve the evidence base for the treatment of these symptoms. Our criteria for demonstrating success of the feasibility study are: (1) recruitment of at least 80% of the study sample, (2) uptake of intervention by at least 80% of participants in the active arm of the trial and (3) completion of follow-up interviews at 12 weeks by at least 75% of the study participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN30191436 . Registered on 19 December 2016.

A systematic review of the methodological and practical challenges of undertaking randomised-controlled trials with cognitive disability populations

Approximately 10% of the world's population have a cognitive disability. Cognitive disabilities can have a profound impact on a person's social, cognitive or mental functioning, requiring high levels of costly health and social support. Therefore, it is imperative that interventions and services received are based upon a sound evidence-base. For many interventions for this population, this evidence-base does not yet exist and there is a need for more Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs). The process of conducting RCTs with disabled populations is fraught with methodological challenges. We need a better understanding of these methodological barriers if the evidence-bases are to be developed. The purpose of this study was to explore the methodological and practical barriers to conducting trials with adults with cognitive disabilities. As a case example, the literature regarding RCTs for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) was used to highlight these pertinent issues. A systematic literature review was conducted of RCTs with adults with ID, published from 2000 to 2017. A total of 53 papers met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Some of the barriers reported were specific to the RCT methodology and others specific to people with disabilities. Notable barriers included; difficulties recruiting; obtaining consent; resistance to the use of control groups; engaging with carers, staff and stakeholders; the need to adapt interventions and resources to be disability-accessible; and staff turnover. Conducting RCTs with people with cognitive disabilities can be challenging, however with reasonable adjustments, many of these barriers can be overcome. Researchers are not maximising the sharing of their experience-base. As a result, the development of evidence-bases remains slow and the health inequities of people with disabilities will continue to grow. The importance of the MRC guidelines on process evaluations, together with implications for the dissemination of 'evidence-base' and 'experience-base' are discussed.

Nidotherapy compared with enhanced care programme approach training for adults with aggressive challenging behaviour and intellectual disability (NIDABID): cluster-randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Aggressive challenging behaviour is very common in care homes for people with intellectual disability, and better psychological treatments are needed. Nidotherapy aims to change the environment of people with mental illness and is an appropriate treatment for this group of disorders.

METHOD

The design was a cluster randomised trial of 20 care homes in which the staff either received training in nidotherapy or the enhanced care programme approach (ECPA), with equivalent duration of treatment in each arm. Cluster randomisation of care homes was carried out at the beginning of the study by an independent statistician. Primary and secondary outcomes were not specified exactly in view of absence of previous study data, but changes over time in scores on two scales, the Modified Overt Aggression Scale and the Problem Behaviour Check List were the main outcome measures. Serious violent incidents were recorded using the Quantification of Violence Scale. All these measures were recorded monthly by research assistants who were carefully kept blind to the allocation of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 200 residents entered the trial, 115 allocated to the ECPA arm and 85 to the nidotherapy one. Seven residents left the care homes in the course of the study, and six were replaced; these were included 79 in the analysis as the trial was a pragmatic one. There were no material reductions in challenging behaviour in the first 8 months of the trial in either group, but in the last 7 months, those allocated to nidotherapy had a 33% reduction in Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) scores and a 43% reduction in Problem Behaviour Check List scores compared with 5% and 13%, respectively, for the ECPA group, differences which for the MOAS were close to statistical significance.

DISCUSSION

Nidotherapy shows promise in the management of aggressive challenging behaviour in care homes, but a delay in its benefit might be expected if given to staff only. The treatment is worthy of further evaluation and development.

A Comparison of Two Methods for Recruiting Children with an Intellectual Disability

BACKGROUND

Recruitment is a widely cited barrier of representative intellectual disability research, yet it is rarely studied. This study aims to document the rates of recruiting children with intellectual disabilities using two methods and discuss the impact of such methods on sample characteristics.

METHODS

Questionnaire completion rates are compared between (i) participants being approached in child development centre waiting rooms and (ii), one year later, the same participants being invited to take part by phone, email and/or post.

RESULTS

The face-to-face recruitment method resulted in a better recruitment rate (58.5% compared to 18.5%) and a larger sample (n = 438) than the telephone/email/post sample (n = 40). It also required less hours of researcher time per completed questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

In-line with previous research, recruitment of participants with intellectual disabilities (or their parents/carers) requires significant time and resources to get a sample of an acceptable size.

Where are persons with intellectual disabilities in medical research? A survey of published clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Persons with intellectual disabilities (ID) are exposed to the same medical interventions as everyone else. Given the unique health profiles of many persons with ID, it cannot be assumed that they will react to medical treatments the same as persons without ID. It is not clear if medical clinical trials routinely include persons with ID. The purpose of this research survey was to examine the inclusion of persons with ID in medical research trials, and to determine whether accommodations and/or study modifications could have been made to promote greater inclusion in medical research.

METHOD

Three hundred randomised control and clinical trials published between 2007 and 2011 in the six highest impact medical journals were randomly selected. Each study was reviewed for inclusion of persons with ID, and possible accommodations that could have been put in place without compromising research integrity. Corresponding authors received a follow-up survey to determine whether persons with ID were included, but were not mentioned in the article.

RESULTS

Only 6 (2%) of 300 randomly chosen studies clearly included persons with ID. Over 90% of studies were designed in ways that would automatically exclude persons with ID from participating. The author survey revealed three additional studies including persons with ID. Most persons with ID could have participated in at least 70% of the studies with simple accommodations and/or minor procedural modifications.

DISCUSSION

The findings highlight the exclusion of persons with ID in medical research. Efforts are needed to increase inclusion through research policy initiatives and education.

The effectiveness of aripiprazole in the management of problem behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities, developmental disabilities and/or autistic spectrum disorder--a systematic review

The management of problem behaviours (PB) in individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID), developmental disabilities (DD) and/or autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) can be challenging. Antipsychotic medications are commonly prescribed where other strategies have failed. A systematic review (SR) was conducted to establish the research evidence for the efficacy of aripiprazole in the management of PB in adults and children with ID, DD and/or ASD. Although included studies supported the efficacy of aripiprazole for this indication, the overall quality of studies was poor. Of the 20 studies included in this systematic review there were only two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on children with ASD and/or ID/DD, both of which were conducted by the pharmaceutical company that manufactures aripiprazole, and it is not clear whether a number of same participants were included in both RCTs. One of the RCTs was extended into an open label long term follow up, which showed that aripiprazole's efficacy lasted over 52 weeks and the adverse effects were tolerable. Four studies were open label prospective studies, 11 were retrospective case reports which included four single case reports, and two were prospective case series. Most studies reported adverse effects from aripiprazole in the form of weight gain, increased appetite, sedation, tiredness, drooling and tremor. However, aripiprazole improved serum prolactin level in some participants and overall did not show any adverse effect on QTc interval. There is a need for more carefully designed RCTs into the use of aripiprazole in the management of PB in people with ID/DD and/or ASD, which should be carried out independent of pharmaceutical companies.

Effects of controlled discontinuation of long-term used antipsychotics for behavioural symptoms in individuals with intellectual disability

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics are frequently and often long-term used for challenging behaviour in persons with intellectual disability (ID), but the evidence base for this is meagre. As these agents may cause harmful side effects, discontinuation should be considered. Previous studies regarding discontinuation of long-term used antipsychotics mostly were uncontrolled and involved small numbers. The primary objective was to investigate the effects of controlled discontinuation of antipsychotics prescribed for challenging behaviour. Secondary objectives were to compare the results of two discontinuation time schedules, to compare groups of participants who had and had not achieved complete discontinuation, and to identify patient and medication characteristics that might predict the outcomes. Our hypothesis was that discontinuation of antipsychotics used for behavioural symptoms would not lead to worsening in behaviour.

METHODS

This was a multi-centre parallel-group study comparing two discontinuation schedules of 14 and 28 weeks. Allocation to the two discontinuation schedules took place in a 1:1 ratio. Antipsychotics were tapered off every 2 or 4 weeks with approximately 12.5% of the initial dosage. Follow-up was 12 weeks after the scheduled complete discontinuation, that is, 26 or 40 weeks after the first dose reduction, respectively. Discontinuation was stopped in case of significant behavioural worsening. Participants were 98 residents with ID of three care providing organisations in the Netherlands, aged 15-66 year, who had used for more than 1 year one or more of the six most frequently prescribed antipsychotics for challenging behaviour. Main outcome measure was the total score of the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC); also ABC sub-scales were used.

RESULTS

Of 98 participants, 43 achieved complete discontinuation; at follow-up 7 had resumed use of antipsychotics. Mean ABC ratings improved significantly for those who achieved complete discontinuation (directly after discontinuation, P < 0.01 and at follow-up, P = 0.03), and at follow-up (P = 0.03) for those who had not achieved complete discontinuation. Similar results were found with respect to most ABC sub-scales, including the 'irritability' sub-scale. There were no significant differences in improvement of ABC ratings between both discontinuation schedules. Higher ratings of extrapyramidal and autonomic symptoms at baseline were associated with less improvement of behavioural symptoms after discontinuation; higher baseline ABC rating predicted higher odds of incomplete discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Discontinuation of antipsychotics prescribed for challenging behaviour in patients with ID is associated with improved behavioural functioning. There is no need to taper off in a time frame longer than 14 weeks.

The advance of research governance in psychiatry: one step forward, two steps back

Purpose. To investigate the reasons behind difficulties in recruiting patients to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in psychiatry and to examine a database of RCTs for differences between studies in mental health and other specialities. Methods. A discussion of recent changes in research governance in the UK and Europe followed by an examination of the database of all trials supported by the Health Technology Assessment programme of the National Institute of Health Research in the UK between 1993 and 2007 to determine if three different measures, (i) time between grant approval and study start date, (ii) percentage of additional time given to extend recruitment and (iii) percentage of planned recruitment achieved, changed over the time period studied and differed between mental health, cancer and other medical disciplines. Findings. Despite attempts in the UK to accelerate the process of clinical trials in recent years, there was a significant increase in the extension time for trials to be completed (p = 0.038) and the percentage of planned recruitment to mental health studies (71%) was significantly less than for cancer (90.3%) and other studies (86.1%) (p = 0.032). Summary. These results suggest that, despite the priority afforded to the advancement of RCTs in healthcare, such studies are encountering increasing difficulty in recruiting to time and target. We suggest that this difficulty can be attributed, at least in part, to the excessively byzantine regulation and governance processes for health research in the UK, and unnecessary bureaucracy in the current National Health Service system. Mental health studies appear particularly vulnerable to delay and better systems to facilitate recruitment are required urgently for the evidence base to be improved and facilitate new cost-effective interventions.

Recruitment to intellectual disability research: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Difficulties in the recruitment of adults with intellectual disability (ID) to research studies are well described but little studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the difficulties in recruiting to a specific research project, in order to inform future recruitment to ID research.

METHODS

Individual semi-structured interviews were held between September 2009 and May 2010 with people who had been involved as intermediaries in recruitment to the research project. These were transcribed verbatim and were independently analysed by two researchers using the Framework approach, who then agreed upon the key emerging themes.

RESULTS

Ten interviews were analysed. A number of themes arose, including participant factors (interview anxiety, difficulties in understanding the concept of research, worry about negative feedback), the importance of the researcher (using a personal approach, meeting potential participants prior to recruitment) and motivators [enjoyment of the research interview (participant), obtaining a medical assessment (carer)]. The themes were then used to generate strategies to improve recruitment to ID research: these include the research team applying a more personal approach, developing the recruitment process to allow for multiple meetings with potential participants, and considering motivators for both participants and carers.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has used the experiences of intermediaries to identify strategies for improving recruitment to future ID research. This has implications in terms of both time and money. However, successful recruitment is essential to ID research, and we hope that the study will be used by ID researchers to review and improve their recruitment processes.

A neuroimaging proof of principle study of Down's syndrome and dementia: ethical and methodological challenges in intrusive research

BACKGROUND

Research into specific illnesses and the development of new treatments may only become possible as new technologies become available. When used for research, such technologies may best be described as 'intrusive', in that they require a considerable willingness and commitment on the part of the participants. This has increasingly been the case for brain disorders and illnesses where novel neuroimaging techniques, often combined with clinical and psychological assessments, have the potential to result in new understanding. People with intellectual disabilities (ID) have a history of under-representation as participants in research using such technologies and are therefore at risk of not receiving equal access to state-of-the-art treatments. We propose that 'intrusive' biomedical research is both possible and ethical in ID, and explore some of the methodological challenges by reference to a recent proof of principle study that used a relatively new ligand-based brain scanning technique in a group of volunteers with Down's syndrome.

METHODS

Five overlapping stages of the study methodology were identified and evaluated for their acceptability to volunteers with mild to moderate ID through discussion, reflection, and analysis of structured feedback in the context of key policy documents, ethical guidelines and relevant legislation.

RESULTS

Identification of key ethical and methodological challenges from reflective practice and participant feedback facilitated the emergence of strategies that permitted continual refinement of the study design. Important areas considered included (1) being clear about the purpose and scientific justification for the study; (2) reconciling the potential risks and benefits with relevant ethical guidelines and legislation; (3) identifying and implementing effective recruitment strategies; (4) optimising and assessing capacity to consent; and (5) making the 'intrusive' procedures as acceptable as possible to people with ID.

CONCLUSION

We were able to demonstrate that a proof of principle study incorporating a novel brain scanning technique in a group of volunteers with ID was feasible, safe and well tolerated, despite the vulnerabilities of the study cohort and the intrusive nature of the research. We consider the study within an ethical and historical discourse about the principles that define current 'best practice' in ID research and propose a number of key recommendations for making intrusive research acceptable in people with ID.

Efficacy of atypical antipsychotic medication in the management of behaviour problems in children with intellectual disabilities and borderline intelligence: a systematic review

The use of medications to manage problem behaviours is widespread. However, robust evidence to support their use seems to be lacking. The aim was to review research evidence into the efficacy of atypical antipsychotic medication in managing problem behaviour in children with intellectual disabilities and borderline intelligence. A systematic review was conducted for placebo-controlled randomised double-blind trials. The included studies (N = 6) showed that risperidone was significantly more effective than placebo in managing problem behaviours. However, most studies highlighted adverse events primarily somnolence and weight gain. There is now some evidence in favour of the use of risperidone. However, because of possible adverse events, these medications have to be used with caution.

Social validity of randomised controlled trials in health services research and intellectual disabilities: a qualitative exploration of stakeholder views

Background

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard of evidence-based practice in medicine but they have had limited influence in the field of intellectual disabilities. Previous literature suggests that participants and professionals have limited tolerance for this type of research methodology. However, it is not known how well service users, carers and other health professionals understand and accept the need for RCTs, and why it is important for individuals with intellectual disabilities to be included in this kind of research.

Methods

We examined individual perceptions of RCTs in 51 participants (18 carers, 6 service users and 27 professionals) using semi-structured interviews. A framework approach was adopted in the analysis of data.

Results

We found that participants had concerns about capacity and resource allocation but held positive views towards this type of research methodology. Understanding of the principles behind RCTs was poor amongst service users and a minority of carers, but mediated by previous exposure to research for professionals.

Conclusions

The social validity of RCTs in intellectual disabilities may be compromised by lack of understanding of the design and the on-going concerns about obtaining informed consent especially in incapacitated adults. However, the overall finding that the need for this form of research was seen in a positive light suggests that there is a turning point in the perceptions of stakeholders working in intellectual disabilities services. We recommend that researchers include on-going education on RCT design during trials, tailoring it to all stakeholders with emphasis on strong service user and care involvement. This could be a pivotal element in improving acceptability of, and recruitment to RCTs.

Antipsychotic drug side effects for persons with intellectual disability

Antipsychotic drugs are the most frequently prescribed of the psychotropic drugs among the intellectually disabled (ID) population. Given their widespread use, efforts to systematically assess and report side effects are warranted. Specific scaling methods such as the Matson Evaluation of Side Effects (MEDS), the Abnormal Inventory Movement Scale (AIMS), and Dyskinesia Identification System Condensed User Scale (DISCUS) are reviewed. Symptom patterns and a focus on additional research are discussed. While progress has been made, more and more systematic methods to research these problems are necessary.