NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission

People with neurodevelopmental disabilities are frequently prescribed or administered psychotropic medication, particularly to manage behaviours of concern. Reducing inappropriate psychotropic use has been the target of international research and policy for several decades. Six electronic databases were searched for interventions to reduce inappropriate prescribing or administration of psychotropics in this population. Sixteen pre-post studies were included in this review. Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in the number of participants receiving psychotropics for medication review, multi-component interventions, workplace training, and organisational guidelines and policies (risk ratio [RR] = 0.52, 95% CI [0.43, 0.62], p < 0.00). Subgroup analysis showed significant reductions with all interventions, with no apparent differences in reduction size between intervention types. Interventions reduced psychotropic use in a meta-analysis of pre-post studies. However, potential bias and high heterogeneity suggest that randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are needed for more definitive conclusions.

Evidence suggests that atypical antipsychotics probably reduce irritability, ADHD-related medications may reduce irritability slightly, and neurohormones may have little to no effect on irritability in the short term in people with ASD. There was some evidence that atypical antipsychotics may reduce self-injury in the short term, although the evidence is uncertain. There was no clear evidence that antidepressants had an effect on irritability. There was also little to no difference in aggression between atypical antipsychotics and placebo, or self-injury between ADHD-related medications and placebo. However, there was some evidence that atypical antipsychotics may result in a large reduction in self-injury, although the evidence is uncertain. No data were reported (or could be used) for self-injury or aggression for neurohormones versus placebo. Studies reported a wide range of potential AEs. Atypical antipsychotics and ADHD-related medications in particular were associated with an increased risk of metabolic and neurological AEs, although the evidence is uncertain for atypical antipsychotics and very uncertain for ADHD-related medications. The other drug classes had minimal or no associated AEs.

While disability is recognised by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) as an evolving concept, the language of positive behaviour support has not kept pace with the current human rights-based approach. The widely-used terms ‘challenging behaviour’ and ‘behaviours that challenge’ imply that the behaviour is inherent in a person with disability. Words have power in shaping practice: when the behaviour of the person with disability is framed as the problem, this leads to a pathologisation or labelling that can provide a rationale to medicate and restrain as a way of ‘managing the challenging behaviour’. Many behaviours seen as being challenging could be better understood as ‘adaptive behaviours to maladaptive environments’, or legitimate responses to difficult environments and situations. In this paper, we argue that the language and implementation of positive behaviour support should better take into account the CRPD and contemporary evidence on behaviour change interventions, which support a shift away from focusing on individuals’ behaviours towards putting environments front and centre. We outline how the social-ecological model could be used as a framework to more explicitly address ‘environments of concern’ in developing tailored and system-wide responses to behaviour support needs. We argue there is an urgency for this paradigm shift to better reflect the views of people with disability and improve outcomes.