Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Epilepsy, anti-seizure medication, intellectual disability and challenging behaviour – Everyone's business, no one's priority

  • M. O. Kinney
  • , V. Chester
  • , S. Tromans
  • , R. T. Alexander
  • , H. Angus-Leppan
  • , M. Bagary
  • , H. Cock
  • , J. Devapriam
  • , A. Hassiotis
  • , M. Mula
  • , M. Reuber
  • , H. Ring
  • , A. Roy
  • , M. Scheepers
  • , R. Shankar*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Royal Victoria Hospital Belfast
  • Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust
  • University of East Anglia
  • University of Leicester
  • Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust
  • University of Hertfordshire
  • Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust
  • University College London
  • Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust
  • St George's University of London
  • St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust
  • Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust
  • University of Sheffield
  • University of Cambridge
  • Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust
  • Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Purpose: People with Intellectual Disability (ID) and epilepsy are more likely to experience psychiatric conditions, challenging behaviour (CB), treatment resistance and adverse effects of anti-seizure medications (ASM) than those without. This population receives care from various professionals, depending on local care pathways. This study evaluates the training status, confidence, reported assessment and management practices of different professional groups involved in caring for people with ID, epilepsy and CB. Methods: A cross sectional survey using a questionnaire developed by expert consensus which measured self-reported training status, confidence, and approaches to assessment and management of CB in people with ID and epilepsy was distributed to practitioners involved in epilepsy and/or ID. Results: Of the 83 respondents, the majority had either a psychiatry/ID (n = 39), or Neurology/epileptology background (n = 31). Psychiatry/ID and Neurology/epileptology had similar confidence in assessing CB in ID-epilepsy cases, but Psychiatry/ID exhibited higher self-rated confidence in the management of these cases. While assessing and managing CB, Psychiatry/ID appeared more likely to consider mental health aspects, while Neurology/epileptology typically focused on ASM. Conclusion: Psychiatry/ID and Neurology/epileptology professionals had varying training levels in epilepsy, ID and CB, had differing confidence levels in managing this patient population, and considered different factors when approaching assessment and management. As such, training opportunities in ID should be offered to neurology professionals, and vice versa. Based on the findings, a best practice checklist is presented, which aims to provide clinicians with a structured framework to consider causal explanations for CB in this population.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)111-116
Number of pages6
JournalSeizure
Volume81
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Jul 2020

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Neurology (clinical)

Keywords

  • Anti-seizure medication
  • epilepsy
  • Learning disability

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Epilepsy, anti-seizure medication, intellectual disability and challenging behaviour – Everyone's business, no one's priority'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this