Page 163 - Demo

Implementing MDET: Evaluating adaptations and effectiveness1616Prerequisites to execute MDETOrganisations A and C appointed independent MDET-expert teams, overseen by a coordinator responsible for implementing MDET. These coordinators initiated MDET team meetings aimed at sharing experiences in performing the MDET method and discussing difficult cases with regard to reduction of involuntary care. Organisation B and D did not appoint independent MDETexpert teams. Because organisation B is a small organisation, they chose to embed the MDET method into the regular work routines of all behaviour specialists. %u201cActually, we kind of let go of an actual expert team. At our 5 care homes, we created 5 expert teams in which the basis was formed by the triangle of behavioural expert of that care home, the care coordinator and the team leader. And then two experts were added to the team to look at involuntary care from an independent perspective. Because, of course, if only this triangle reflects on involuntary care, it%u2019s quickly a coloured view. However, we did leave it up to the triangle to decide which people to include as expert.%u201d (Organisation B)Organisation D determined that executing MDET in care homes would be overly demanding in terms of time for experts and could feasibly be managed by process supervisors, who were care professionals involved in one of the care teams in the intervention condition who were crossmatched to another care team in the intervention condition. Organisation A experimented with involving experts-by-experience (clients with a mild intellectual disability) in their MDET-expert team, to broaden the multidisciplinary perspective. They gave advice regarding proposed interventions in consultation plans. Their input was evaluated as valuable, even though for privacy reasons, they could only be involved in an advisory role. Other organisations mentioned the complexity of involving expertsby-experience. One organisation also questioned whether clients with mild intellectual disabilities could sufficiently empathise with people with more severe intellectual disabilities regarding involuntary care.