Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:41:32.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Improving “reasonable adjustments” for people with autism in the York Early Intervention in Psychosis Service

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2021

Daniel Whitney*
Affiliation:
Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust
Emma Faravelli
Affiliation:
Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust
Stephen Wright
Affiliation:
Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust
*
*corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

Studies 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.

Method

There 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.

Result

The 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.

Conclusion

Autistic 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.

Type
Service Evaluation
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.