7 research outputs found

    What do we know about the health and healthcare of people with intellectual disabilities from minority ethnic groups in the United Kingdom?:A systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background. People with from minority ethnic communities face inequalities in health and healthcare. This systematic review considers the question of what we know about the health and healthcare of children and adults with intellectual disabilities from ethnic minority communities in the UK. Method. Studies published from 1990 to 2018 were identified via electronic literature databases, email requests, and cross-citations. Studies were reviewed narratively in relation to identified themes. Results. 23 studies were identified, most commonly focusing on South Asian communities. Very little information was identified on physical health or physical healthcare, with the identified evidence tending to focus on mental health care, access to specialist intellectual disability services, and inpatient services. Conclusion. Little is known about the health status of people with intellectual disabilities from minority ethnic groups in the UK. It is clear that they may experience barriers to accessing specialist intellectual disability services and other forms of healthcare

    Ethnic inequalities and pathways to care in psychosis in England: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    Š The Author(s). 2018Background: As part of a national programme to tackle ethnic inequalities, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of research on ethnic inequalities in pathways to care for adults with psychosis living in England and/or Wales. Methods: Nine databases were searched from inception to 03.07.17 for previous systematic reviews, including forward and backward citation tracking and a PROSPERO search to identify ongoing reviews. We then carried forward relevant primary studies from included reviews (with the latest meta-analyses reporting on research up to 2012), supplemented by a search on 18.10.17 in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL for primary studies between 2012 and 2017 that had not been covered by previous meta-analyses. Results: Forty studies, all conducted in England, were included for our updated meta-analyses on pathways to care. Relative to the White reference group, elevated rates of civil detentions were found for Black Caribbean (OR = 3.43, 95% CI = 2.68 to 4.40, n = 18), Black African (OR = 3.11, 95% CI = 2.40 to 4.02, n = 6), and South Asian patients (OR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.12, n = 10). Analyses of each Mental Health Act section revealed significantly higher rates for Black people under (civil) Section 2 (OR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.11 to 2.11, n = 3). Rates in repeat admissions were significantly higher than in first admission for South Asian patients (between-group difference p < 0.01). Some ethnic groups had more police contact (Black African OR = 3.60, 95% CI = 2.15 to 6.05, n = 2; Black Caribbean OR = 2.64, 95% CI = 1.88 to 3.72, n = 8) and criminal justice system involvement (Black Caribbean OR = 2.76, 95% CI = 2.02 to 3.78, n = 5; Black African OR = 1.92, 95% CI = 1.32 to 2.78, n = 3). The White Other patients also showed greater police and criminal justice system involvement than White British patients (OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.15, n = 4). General practitioner involvement was less likely for Black than the White reference group. No significant variations over time were found across all the main outcomes. Conclusions: Our updated meta-analyses reveal persisting but not significantly worsening patterns of ethnic inequalities in pathways to psychiatric care, particularly affecting Black groups. This provides a comprehensive evidence base from which to inform policy and practice amidst a prospective Mental Health Act reform. Trial registration: CRD42017071663Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

    Performance indicators for public mental healthcare: a systematic international inventory

    No full text

    The 'Choice and Autonomy Framework' : implications for occupational therapy practice

    No full text
    Introduction This paper presents findings from a PhD study exploring autonomy of adults with physical disability. The plethora of descriptions of autonomy in psychological, occupational therapy and rehabilitation literature (e.g. Ryan and Deci 2000, Rogers 1982, Cardol et al 2002) detracts from the centrality of autonomy and results in difficulty incorporating it into occupational therapy practice. This paper presents a framework providing an integrated, clinically useful approach to autonomy. Methods Sixteen people were recruited, based on age, gender, impairment and living circumstances (community/residential settings). All have significant physical disability, use a wheelchair and require personal assistance for some/all self-care activities. Qualitative methods were used for data collection, including life-history narrative, diary information and extensive interview. An integrated method of analysis was used, including content analysis and bracketing. Results The ‘Choice and Autonomy Framework’ consists of five strands, including: • the meaning of autonomy • whether or not autonomy is a goal or value • the experience of autonomy • personality factors that impact autonomy • environmental features that enhance or negate autonomy. This paper will describe each strand, as derived from the research. The results suggest that, contrary to common wisdom (Hmel and Pincus 2002), autonomy is not necessarily a universal goal for people with physical disability; an understanding of the person’s own perspective will enhance person-centred practice and enable therapists to further recognise individuality of clients. It will argue that the concept of autonomy needs to be further understood and incorporated into occupational therapy practice
    corecore