Audit of Health Services for People with Intellectual Disabilities
Author Information
Author(s): Jennifer Clegg
Primary Institution: University Hospital Nottingham, UK
Hypothesis
What are the conceptual positions that inform audit in health services for people with intellectual disabilities?
Conclusion
The investigation revealed that audits do not effectively improve services for people with intellectual disabilities and may even hinder progress.
Supporting Evidence
- Audits measure adherence to government policy rather than service quality.
- Many aspirations for services have not been achieved despite audits.
- Audit processes can demoralize staff and inhibit meaningful evaluation.
Takeaway
This study looked at how audits of health services for people with intellectual disabilities work and found that they often don't help improve care.
Methodology
The study involved a detailed examination of the Healthcare Commission's investigation into the learning disability service at Sutton and Merton.
Potential Biases
The audit process may impose an ideology that does not reflect the realities of service provision.
Limitations
The study primarily critiques the audit process without providing alternative evaluation methods.
Participant Demographics
The study focuses on health services for people with intellectual disabilities in the UK.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website