Premium
Anger management interventions for adults with learning disabilities living in the community: a review of recent (2000–2010) evidence
Author(s) -
Borsay Clare
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
british journal of learning disabilities
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.633
H-Index - 39
eISSN - 1468-3156
pISSN - 1354-4187
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-3156.2011.00720.x
Subject(s) - anger , learning disability , psychological intervention , psychology , anger management , scope (computer science) , quarter (canadian coin) , clinical psychology , gerontology , medical education , developmental psychology , psychiatry , medicine , archaeology , history , computer science , programming language
Accessible summary• One in four adults with learning disabilities living in the community find it hard to manage their anger. • This can make life hard for adults with learning disabilities and the people who support them. • This study looks at research on helping adults with learning disabilities to manage their anger. • More research needs to be carried out to find better ways of helping adults with learning disabilities to manage their anger.Summary Estimates suggest that around a quarter of adults with learning disabilities living in the community have difficulties controlling their anger. Angry or aggressive behaviour can have serious repercussions, including loss of residential or day placements, admission to hospital and reduced quality of life. In addition, the psychological well being of both paid and family carers can be adversely affected. A previous review of this area (Whitaker 2001) suggested equivocal results for cognitive‐behavioural (CBT) approaches. The current study provides an update to this review, considering papers published in the last 10 years and expanding its scope to include a variety of therapeutic interventions. A systematic search of peer‐reviewed journals identified 14 relevant documents, the majority of which were group‐based and CBT in their approach. Overall, methodological weaknesses made it difficult to draw any firm conclusions about the effectiveness of the different approaches. Implications for clinical and research practice are discussed.