Showing posts with label qualitative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label qualitative. Show all posts

Thursday, 14 June 2018

"Theme 3: Inadequate Provision for Post-diagnostic Support" for autism

The qualitative findings reported by Laura Crane and colleagues [1] on the topic of autism diagnosis here in Blighty provide some useful information that *could* help make the diagnostic process easier and more 'user-friendly'. The findings also highlight some important gaps in the current mechanisms being utilised...

The paper is open-access but basically set out to examine "the views and experiences of ten autistic adults, ten parents of children on the autism spectrum, and ten professionals involved in autism diagnosis, all based in the United Kingdom (UK)." You'll note that the participant numbers for each individual category weren't huge so one has to be slightly cautious about how representative the results are to the wider autism spectrum. Indeed, although not a fan of the term 'functioning' in relation to autism, I note that only two of the children were diagnosed with a learning (intellectual) disability and over half were diagnosed with Asperger syndrome. Alongside the report that of the 10 adults interviewed, nine were diagnosed with Asperger syndrome and several were educated to degree level or above (4/10), and you might reasonably conclude that this was a study weighted towards the more 'able end of the autism spectrum'. I say that again minus the use of the 'functioning' label but understanding that there are 'parts' of the autism spectrum still very much under-represented in this and other research areas (see here)...

No mind, the authors discuss the themes that emerged during telephone interviews with regards to "three important stages of the diagnostic pathway: (1) accessing a diagnostic service; (2) the diagnostic process; and (3) post-diagnostic support." The results are revealing...

I've zoomed in on one of the themes that emerged from the study: "Theme 3: Inadequate Provision for Post-diagnostic Support." I did this because this is the part of the diagnostic machinery that probably has the longest-term effects and has been covered before on this blog (see here). It's not that I don't for example, accept the importance of "vague and inconsistent routes available for accessing an autism diagnosis" or "professionals’ tendency to focus on negatives, not positives". Merely that post-diagnosis, many children and adults are seemingly left to fend for themselves and/or take up further battles in order to get the help and support they require. This, set in a time of increasing need and continuing finite resources (see here).

Within theme 3 around post-diagnostic services and support, we hear some familiar stories. So: "Getting the diagnosis is only the start of the journey and as far as the paediatrician was concerned, that was the end of the journey" and "[you need someone] to support you and direct you…this is where the system fails" are just two of the examples included in the Crane paper. In other words, tick boxes for getting assessments and diagnoses are ticked, but then 'don't let the door hit you on the way out' sentiments seemingly follow. That's not to blame assessment teams or diagnosing clinicians who do a sterling job often under pressure (see here), merely to point out how the system is current set out.

Another phrase included by the authors adds to the 'inadequate provision' sentiments expressed: "When services were made available to support autistic people and their families, these tend not to be offered until crisis point was reached." It seems that one has to be literally be at the end of ones tether before anything like the resources needed are given out, and even then, in a reactive sense. And thereafter: "when support was provided (and was felt to be useful), financial constraints sometimes meant that services were withdrawn". Such issues were seemingly spread across both child and adult experiences, as the call for "a solid, government-backed organisation that could help rather than these sort of variegated charities that are all struggling financially" went out. What a good idea: a national post-diagnosis autism agency...

I'm also going to highlight the 'lack of emotional support' picked up in the Crane paper. The adults diagnosed with autism certainly "found their involvement in the assessment process both emotional and challenging" because sometimes the very probing questions used as part of the assessment process brought up things that some people were probably trying very hard to forget. I personally think that this is an under-appreciated side of post-diagnosis in the context of autism, where the diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is perhaps 'under-used' (see here) in light of the effects of past traumas (I use the word 'trauma' minus the psychobabble connotations).

Crane et al also provide a dose of reality in terms of what parents go through too before, during and after the diagnostic process for their children. So: "I was literally on my knees anyway…it’s so tiring having boys with Aspergers" and "I felt quite on my own. No-one in my family really understood, I didn’t have any friends that had had similar experiences." Such reports are just as important as the other reports included in their study; illustrating how having a child diagnosed with autism can be a roller coaster of emotions, and the strong requirement for "whole family support needs" including things like respite care (see here). I say all this set against a backdrop, particularly on social media, where parents are sometimes/often castigated for speaking their truth and their reality about raising children on the autism spectrum, seemingly because their narrative doesn't fit the agenda of others. Yes, the views of people with autism / autistic people count, but so do the views of those who raise them too (see here). And social media 'discussions' for example, about 'informed consent' before posting pictures and reciting specific child-rearing events, whilst important, cannot just be solely applied to parents of autistic children either...

There are seemingly lots of things that can be done to improve the diagnostic and post-diagnostic experiences related to autism on the basis of the Crane findings. One would hope that policy - (peer-reviewed) evidence-based policy - would be listening and wanting to change things for the good of all concerned: those on the autism spectrum, their parents and other loved ones and the professionals who do a remarkable job with all-too finite resources. I fear however, that the reality is yet again going to be tied into one solitary question; a question that crops up time and time again: how much is it all going to cost?

----------

[1] Crane L. et al. Autism Diagnosis in the United Kingdom: Perspectives of Autistic Adults, Parents and Professionals. J Autism Developmental Disorders. 2018. June 12.

----------

Thursday, 10 May 2018

"To Be Quite Honest, If It Wasn't for Videogames I Wouldn't Have a Social Life at All"

The quote heading this post - "To Be Quite Honest, If It Wasn't for Videogames I Wouldn't Have a Social Life at All" - comes from the findings reported by Erinn Finke and colleagues [1]. They looked at "the perceptions of individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who play videogames as their primary leisure activity regarding the role of videogames in their lives and their motivations for playing videogames."

I've kinda touched on this topic before on this blog (see here) and some of the ins-and-outs of 'pathological' videogame use in the context of autism. On that blogging occasion, I mentioned how one has to be a little careful about 'demonising' an activity that (a) is enjoyed by millions of people, some of whom are and some aren't diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder, and (b) could, through the wonders of online gaming, provide a valuable 'social' outlet to a population who either might prefer limited face-to-face contact or are in many ways, discriminated against when it comes to more traditional forms of social inclusion and participation (see here). Apparently this area is also something that has been mentioned at the INSAR conference this year too. The downsides to gaming: well, every moment sat in front of a screen is a moment that could have been used in other more physically active pursuits (something that is quite a big issue when it comes to quite a proportion of the autism spectrum). I might also add that mention of the word 'online' can sometimes mean opening up a whole can of worms...

Finke et al relied on a qualitative study methodology that involved asking young adults about their experiences of videogame playing. Bearing in mind the small number of participants under study, authors observed that "participants perceived playing videogames to have a positive impact on their lives and their development." Aside from the enjoyment angle (an important angle by all accounts), participants mentioned about the 'social' element to their videogame playing. Interesting too was another comment from Finke: "The motivations for playing videogames described are similar to those reported by typically developing populations." Why would they be any different?

The authors see the potential value of videogaming when it comes to "teaching" in the context of autism but I'm slightly reluctant to take up this idea for a few reasons. Foremost is the idea that not every activity where autism is mentioned really needs to be 'medicalised' or indeed, 'interventionised' (if there is such a word). I think back to all the discussions about Lego 'therapy' (see here) for example, and how it would be really easy to turn a pastime that is really enjoyable into something more like schooling, and then onward potentially make it less enjoyable. I would also mention that the types of videogames likely to be enjoyed by those on the autism spectrum are probably the same types of videogames that everyone else likes to play. So developing new 'autism-specific' games with intervention(s) in mind are not likely to go down too well in the context of gaming choice and their applicability to larger audiences. Indeed, it could be seen as discriminatory. And yes, then there is also the notion that 'interventionising' videogames will probably also promote yet more sedentary behaviours, something which we should all be keen to discourage (and I have my views about which physical activities might be considered favourable for many young people both on and off the spectrum).

Music to close and Céline Dion with a special guest... Deadpool? Although, his heart probably will go on given his renowned healing abilities...

----------

[1] Finke EH. et al. "To Be Quite Honest, If It Wasn't for Videogames I Wouldn't Have a Social Life at All": Motivations of Young Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder for Playing Videogames as Leisure. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 Apr 2:1-18.

----------