Centre for Emotiona Health, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Qual Health Res. 2020 Mar;30(4):560-571. doi: 10.1177/1049732319858326. Epub 2019 Jul 22.
Working with individuals with dual disabilities can be a complex process in the presence of limited evidence base to guide clinical practice. The aims of this qualitative study were to investigate perceptions of best practices of Australian psychologists who work with this specialist population. Thirty-eight Australian psychologists working in the intellectual disability field participated in eight semistructured focus groups. Perceptions of evidence-based practice for individuals with intellectual disabilities and in relation to mental health assessment were explored. Psychologists demonstrated resourcefulness in adapting to limits in available evidence-based practice and in modifying mainstream practice to suit the needs of individuals with dual disabilities. Findings suggest the necessity of practice-based evidence in contributing to the evidence base, and person-centered approaches in relation to best practice for people with intellectual disabilities. Implications for strengthening psychologists' clinical competency and bridging the research and practice gap are discussed.
与具有双重残疾的个体合作在证据基础有限的情况下可能是一个复杂的过程，无法为临床实践提供指导。本定性研究的目的是调查澳大利亚从事这一特殊人群工作的心理学家对最佳实践的看法。38 名在智力残疾领域工作的澳大利亚心理学家参加了 8 个半结构化焦点小组。探讨了对智障人士的循证实践以及与心理健康评估相关的循证实践的看法。心理学家在适应现有循证实践的局限性以及调整主流实践以满足双重残疾个体的需求方面表现出了足智多谋。研究结果表明，实践为循证实践做出贡献的必要性，以及与智障人士最佳实践相关的以人为本的方法。讨论了加强心理学家临床能力和弥合研究与实践差距的意义。
