Issues in the prescribing of psychotropic and psychoactive medication for persons with learning disability: quantitative and qualitative perspectives

The administration of psychotropic and psychoactive medication for persons with learning disability and accompanying mental illness and/or challenging behaviour has undergone much critical review over the past two decades. Assessment and diagnosis of mental illness in this population continues to be psychopharmacological treatment include polypharmacy, irrational prescription procedures and frequent over-prescription. It is clear that all forms of treatment including non-pharmacological interventions need to be driven by accurate and appropriate diagnoses. Where a psychiatric diagnosis has been identified, it greatly aides the selection of appropriate medication, although a specific medication for each diagnosis, as was once hoped, is simply no longer a reality in practice. Part one of the present thesis seeks to address many of the current issues in mental health problems and pharmacological treatment to date. The author undertook a drug prevalence study within both residential and community facilities for persons with learning disability within the Mid-West region of Ireland in order to ascertain the current level of prescribing of psychotropic and psychoactive medications for this population. While many attempts have been made to account for the variation in prescribing, little systematic and empirical research has been undertaken to investigate the factors thought to influence such prescribing. While studies investigating the prescribing behaviours of General Practitioners (GP's) have illustrated the complex nature of the decision making process in the context of general practice, no similar efforts have yet been directed at examining the prescribing behaviours of Consultant Psychiatrists. Using The Critical Incident Technique, the author interviewed Consultant Psychiatrists in the Republic of Ireland to gather information relating not only to their patterns of prescribing for learning disabled populations, but also to examine reasons influencing their prescribing in addition to several related factors. Part two of this thesis presents the findings from this study and a number of issues are raised, not only in relation to attempting to account for the findings from part one of the thesis, but also with respect to implications for improved management and clinical practice.

Development of an intervention to support medication management in patients with multimorbidity in primary care

The overarching aim of this thesis was to develop an intervention to support patient-centred prescribing in the context of multimorbidity in primary care. Methods A range of research methods were used to address different components of the Medical Research Council, UK (MRC) guidance on the development and evaluation of complex interventions in health care. The existing evidence on GPs’ perceptions of the management of multimorbidity was systematically reviewed. In qualitative interviews, chart-stimulated recall was used to explore the challenges experienced by GPs when prescribing for multimorbid patients. In a cross-sectional study, the psychosocial issues that complicate the management of multimorbidity were examined. To develop the complex intervention, the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) was used to integrate behavioural theory with the findings of these three studies. A feasibility study of the new intervention was then conducted with GPs. Results The systematic review revealed four domains of clinical practice where GPs experienced difficulties in multimorbidity. The qualitative interview study showed that GPs responded to these difficulties by ‘satisficing’. In multimorbid patients perceived as stable, GPs preferred to ‘maintain the status quo’ rather than actively change medications. In the cross-sectional study, the significant association between multimorbidity and negative psychosocial factors was shown. These findings informed the development of the ‘Multimorbidity Collaborative Medication Review and Decision-making’ (MY COMRADE) intervention. The intervention involves peer support: two GPs review the medications prescribed to a complex multimorbid patient together. In the feasibility study, GPs reported that the intervention was appropriate for the context of general practice; was widely applicable to their patients with multimorbidity; and recommendations for optimising medications arose from all collaborative reviews. Conclusion Applying theory to empirical data has led to an intervention that is implementable in clinical practice, and has the potential to positively change GPs’ behaviour in the management of medications for patients with multimorbidity.