Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Improving “reasonable adjustments” for people with autism in the York Early Intervention in Psychosis Service
View through CrossRef
AimsStudies show the prevalence of Autism Spectrum Conditions in EIP populations is 3.6-3.7% compared to approximately 1-1.5% in the general population. The Equality Act 2010 and the Autism Act 2009 make it a requirement for services to make ‘Reasonable Adjustments’ for people with Autism. The aim of this study was to improve how our service makes Reasonable Adjustments for people with autism.MethodThere were 15 patients in our service with a confirmed diagnosis of Autism. Pre and Post a discussion about reasonable adjustments, we invited them to rate, on a 5 point Likert scale, how well they felt the service was making Reasonable Adjustments for their Autism and whether discussing it had been helpful. We offered face to face or telephone discussions with someone with autism expertise to discuss reasonable adjustments. We allowed at least a month after the discussion before repeating the Likert scale.ResultThe pre-discussion rating, of whether the team was making reasonable adjustments for Autism, showed agreement (mean 4.2/5). This improved to 4.6/5 after a month post discussion about reasonable adjustments. Patients agreed to strongly agreed (4.6/5) that the discussion had been helpful. Reasonable adjustments identified were quite individual but responses followed the following main themes; (1) No adjustments were needed or wanted as some patients saw special arrangements for them as stigmatising and wanted to be treated like everyone else; (2) Adjustments around personal space in appointments eg sitting face to face, not sitting too close, explaining reason before moving closer; (3) Simplification/clarification of written information – eg some identified simpler language use and use of pictures; (4) Environment e.g. quieter, dimmed lights, clarity of signage in reception.ConclusionAutistic patients in our service already rated the team highly at making reasonable adjustments pre and post intervention and found it helpful to have a specific discussion. Reasonable adjustments were highly individualised but some themes emerged around personal space, written communication and clinic environment which staff could consider exploring routinely. Some patients did not want reasonable adjustments as they felt it could be stigmatising. Discussing reasonable adjustments is likely to benefit all patients, not just those with confirmed autism, we would suggest this should be built into routine practice.
Title: Improving “reasonable adjustments” for people with autism in the York Early Intervention in Psychosis Service
Description:
AimsStudies show the prevalence of Autism Spectrum Conditions in EIP populations is 3.
6-3.
7% compared to approximately 1-1.
5% in the general population.
The Equality Act 2010 and the Autism Act 2009 make it a requirement for services to make ‘Reasonable Adjustments’ for people with Autism.
The aim of this study was to improve how our service makes Reasonable Adjustments for people with autism.
MethodThere were 15 patients in our service with a confirmed diagnosis of Autism.
Pre and Post a discussion about reasonable adjustments, we invited them to rate, on a 5 point Likert scale, how well they felt the service was making Reasonable Adjustments for their Autism and whether discussing it had been helpful.
We offered face to face or telephone discussions with someone with autism expertise to discuss reasonable adjustments.
We allowed at least a month after the discussion before repeating the Likert scale.
ResultThe pre-discussion rating, of whether the team was making reasonable adjustments for Autism, showed agreement (mean 4.
2/5).
This improved to 4.
6/5 after a month post discussion about reasonable adjustments.
Patients agreed to strongly agreed (4.
6/5) that the discussion had been helpful.
Reasonable adjustments identified were quite individual but responses followed the following main themes; (1) No adjustments were needed or wanted as some patients saw special arrangements for them as stigmatising and wanted to be treated like everyone else; (2) Adjustments around personal space in appointments eg sitting face to face, not sitting too close, explaining reason before moving closer; (3) Simplification/clarification of written information – eg some identified simpler language use and use of pictures; (4) Environment e.
g.
quieter, dimmed lights, clarity of signage in reception.
ConclusionAutistic patients in our service already rated the team highly at making reasonable adjustments pre and post intervention and found it helpful to have a specific discussion.
Reasonable adjustments were highly individualised but some themes emerged around personal space, written communication and clinic environment which staff could consider exploring routinely.
Some patients did not want reasonable adjustments as they felt it could be stigmatising.
Discussing reasonable adjustments is likely to benefit all patients, not just those with confirmed autism, we would suggest this should be built into routine practice.
Related Results
Feasibility of psychosis risk assessment for adolescents diagnosed with autism
Feasibility of psychosis risk assessment for adolescents diagnosed with autism
Autism and psychosis share overlapping clinical features and can occur comorbidly. Given growing recognition that early identification of psychosis risk symptoms may lead to better...
Disparities in autism spectrum disorder diagnoses among 8-year-old children in Colorado: Who are we missing?
Disparities in autism spectrum disorder diagnoses among 8-year-old children in Colorado: Who are we missing?
There is often a large time gap between caregivers’ initial concerns and the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. The current study aimed to identify factors associated with miss...
Categorical versus dimensional models of early psychosis
Categorical versus dimensional models of early psychosis
AbstractAimEarly psychosis is typically operationalized as a categorical construct by dividing people into one of three diagnostic statuses: low‐risk, clinical high‐risk, and first...
Demographic and autism characteristics as predictors of age of autism diagnosis of individuals with autism in Paraguay
Demographic and autism characteristics as predictors of age of autism diagnosis of individuals with autism in Paraguay
Autism is a lifelong condition characterized by repetitive and restrictive behaviors and differences in social communication. The reported prevalence of autism has risen exponentia...
Brain Organoids, the Path Forward?
Brain Organoids, the Path Forward?
Photo by Maxim Berg on Unsplash
INTRODUCTION
The brain is one of the most foundational parts of being human, and we are still learning about what makes humans unique. Advancements ...
Parental migration and risks of intellectual disability and autism
Parental migration and risks of intellectual disability and autism
<p dir="ltr">Background: Intellectual disability and autism are overlapping heterogeneous neurodevelopmental conditions with early onset. The prevalence of diagnosed autism h...
Parental migration and risks of intellectual disability and autism
Parental migration and risks of intellectual disability and autism
<p dir="ltr">Background: Intellectual disability and autism are overlapping heterogeneous neurodevelopmental conditions with early onset. The prevalence of diagnosed autism h...
Consensus recommendations for usability and acceptability of mobile health autism screening tools
Consensus recommendations for usability and acceptability of mobile health autism screening tools
Mobile health (mHealth; online phone or tablet-based) screening tools for autism are being increasingly used by parents, health care, and educational providers. However, it is uncl...

