Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T20:53:56.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determinants of Staff Behaviour in Long-term Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2009

P. A. Woods  and
Chris Cullen
P. A. Woods
Affiliation:
Bryn-y-Neuadd, Llanfairfechan, Gwynedd
Chris Cullen
Affiliation:
Hester Adrian Research Centre, University of Manchester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For some years now, working with long-stay populations such as the mentally handicapped and elderly mentally infirm has been a “Cinderella” area with difficulties in attracting high quality staff and resources. This has resulted in poor quality of care. There may be many reasons for the relative lack of interest shown by professionals in the problems of long-term care, but two stand out as potentially important:

(a) the rate of client behaviour change and

(b) the permanency of client behaviour change.

Within the areas of out-patient neuroses and other similar nonchronic problems, it is often expected that change can be brought about relatively quickly by trained therapists (cf. Marks, 1981a, b). With chronic problems, however, the situation is quite different. Usually change is only brought about slowly, if at all.

Secondly, with an out-patient population, given new ways with which to cope with their problems, we hope that somehow the natural contingencies will “trap” (Baer and Wolf, 1970) the new repertoires. The client gets better, stays better, and does not come back. From our own experience of this type of work, the situation is rarely so sanguine and with chronic populations, there isn't usually even much reason for hope. We are all too familiar with changes occurring and then the group of clients begins rapidly to slip back to where they started from (or beyond!). We have become accustomed to blaming poor motivation, inadequate training, organizational variables, Hawthorne effects, and so on. Almost anything except ourselves.

In this paper, we look at some failures and some relative successes in achieving desired change in long-stay institutions, and ask the questions “How?” and “Why?”. It should be obvious before we go any further that we do not have definite answers, but the questions are still worth asking. Work with long-stay populations can be extremely exasperating and demanding, but appeals to abandon the large institutions where such groups reside are defeatist.

Type
Research Article
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 1983 , pp. 4 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baer, D. M. and Wolf, M. M. (1970). The entry into natural communities of reinforcement. In Control of Human Behaviour—Volume 2. Ulrich, R., Stachnik, J. and Mabry, J. (Eds), Glenview, Illinois: Scott Foreman and Co.Google Scholar
Baker, R. (1972). The chronic psychiatric patient: a new hope for treatment? Nursing Times, 1161–1163 (16 09).Google Scholar
Brophy, J. (1981). Teacher praise: a functional analysis. Review of Educational Research 51, 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullen, C. (1981). Residents Development Project. First Annual Report to the D.H.S.S. Hester Adrian Research Centre, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
Hunt, J. M. and Marks-Maran, D. J. (1980). Nursing Care Plans. The Nursing Process at Work. London: H.M. and M. Publishers.Google Scholar
Ivancic, M. T., Reid, D. H., Iwata, B. A., Faw, G. D. and Page, T. J. (1981). Evaluating a supervision programme for developing and maintaining therapeutic staff-resident interactions during institutional care routines. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis 14, 95–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kazdin, A. E. (1981). The token economy. In Applications of Conditioning Theory. Davey, G. (Ed.), London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Marks, I. M. (1981a). Review of behavioural psychotherapy I: obsessive–compulsive disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry 138, 584–592.Google Scholar
Marks, I. M. (1981b). Review of behavioural psychotherapy II: sexual disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry 138, 750–756.Google ScholarPubMed
Michael, J. L. (1980). Flight from behaviour analysis. The Behaviour Analyst 3, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montegar, C. A., Reid, D. H., Madsen, C. H. and Ewell, M. D. (1977). Increasing institutional staff-to-resident interactions through in-service training and supervisor approval. Behaviour Therapy 8, 533–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porterfield, J. and Blunden, R. (1978). Establishing an activity period and individual skill training within a day-setting for profoundly mentally handicapped adults. Journal of Practical Approaches to Development Handicap 2(3), 10–15.Google Scholar
Quiltich, H. R. (1975). A comparison of three staff-management procedures. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis 8, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, T. J. (1975). Some ethical considerations of short-term workshops in the principles and methods of behaviour modification. Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis 8, 113–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolz, S. B. (1981). Adoption of innovations from applied behavioural research: “does anybody care?” Journaal of Applied Behaviour Analysis 14, 491–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennant, L., Cullen, C. and Hattersley, J. (1981). Applied behaviour analysis: intervention with retarded people. In Applications of Conditioning Theory. Davey, G. (Ed.), London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Thomas, M., Burton, M. and Cullen, C. (1982). Take a new look at your ward: increasing opportunities for learning on wards with mentally handicapped residents. Nursing Times 78, 1068–1070.Google Scholar
Woods, P. A. and Guest, E. (1980). Toilet training the severely retarded: the importance of evaluation. Nursing Times 76 (12), 53–56.Google ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.