Prevalence of severe behavior disorders in persons with mental retardation and treatment procedures used in community and institutional settings

Abstract

A statewide survey of moderate and severe behavior disorders in persons with mental retardation in institutional and community settings was conducted. Information on the treatment procedures used and the adequacy of available resources in both settings was also gathered. Results indicated that community staff had considerably less experience than institutional staff in dealing with serious behavior disorders exhibited by persons with substantial cognitive and physical impairments. The types of aberrant behaviors with the highest prevalence rates showed differences in the institutions and the community. The largest differences in prevalence rates for severe behavior disorders in the two settings occurred for aggressive and self-injurious behaviors. Community staff thus had appreciably less experience than institutional staff in designing interventions for severe aggressive and self-injurious behaviors. About half of the identified individuals in both settings received psychotropic medications. Institutional staff were most likely to use restrictive behavioral procedures than community staff. Findings indicated that the most restrictive procedures were used primarily with only certain severe behavior disorders. Subjective ratings of the overall effectiveness of interventions were lower by community than institutional staff. The usefulness of the obtained data base for statewide planning in the area of behavioral supports is discussed.Severe behavior disorders are a major concern in programs serving persons with mental retardation. Aberrant behavior is repeatedly cited as an obstacle to successful adjustment of persons with mental retardation to their environ-*

Prevalence and types of aggressive behaviour among adults with intellectual disabilities

“…Rates of aggressive behaviour vary considerably across studies, ranging from 2% to 60% of the ID population (Eyman & Call 1977; Hill et al . 1984; Quine 1986; Gardner & Moffatt 1990; Meador & Osborne 1992; Harris 1993; Borthwick‐Duffy 1994a; Bruininks et al . 1994; Davidson et al .…”

Noncontingent Application Versus Contingent Removal of Tactile Stimulation: Effects on Self-injury in a Young Boy with Multiple Disabilities

“…Common forms of SIB include head-banging and biting, hitting, or scratching oneself. These behaviours can cause serious injury and may inhibit learning and community integration (Meador & Osborn, 1992). Given these potentially deleterious consequences, effective treatment is a priority for children who engage in frequent or severe SIB.…”

Formal versus informal interventions for challenging behaviour in persons with intellectual disabilities

“…Several studies examining interventions used in service settings for persons with ID have reported that many clients with challenging behaviour received psychotropic medication, and restrictive and intrusive interventions, such as time‐out and restraints (Maurice & Trudel 1982; Bruininks et al. 1988; Jacobson 1992; Meador & Osborn 1992; Jacobson & Ackerman 1993; Sigafoos et al. 1994; Peterson & Martens 1995).…”

“…1994; Peterson & Martens 1995). Usually, more intrusive procedures and medications are used in institutional settings and on persons who have more severe functional and behavioural challenges (Meador & Osborn 1992; Jacobson & Ackerman 1993).…”