BACKGROUND: This study provides an overview of empirical research on the effectiveness of quality-enhancing interventions for people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD). METHOD: Through computerised searches of the PsycINFO and ERIC databases, and using several search criteria specifically relating to the target group and to the subject of this review, 16 studies were identified. RESULTS: The interventions described are targeted at the physical and material well-being, emotional well-being, social interactions, choices, and personal development of individuals with PIMD, but do not address community participation and rights. The majority of the studies report positive effects of the interventions on staff and/or client behaviour. However these effects should be interpreted with caution because of methodological and other considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Current research gives only limited insight into the effectiveness of quality-enhancing interventions for people with PIMD. To foster evidence-based practice, further studies of larger groups and with more robust designs are warranted. The potential differential effects associated with client characteristics and the context of the implementation should also be considered.
BACKGROUND: This study provides an overview of empirical research on the effectiveness of quality-enhancing interventions for people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD). METHOD: Through computerised searches of the PsycINFO and ERIC databases, and using several search criteria specifically relating to the target group and to the subject of this review, 16 studies were identified. RESULTS: The interventions described are targeted at the physical and material well-being, emotional well-being, social interactions, choices, and personal development of individuals with PIMD, but do not address community participation and rights. The majority of the studies report positive effects of the interventions on staff and/or client behaviour. However these effects should be interpreted with caution because of methodological and other considerations. CONCLUSIONS: Current research gives only limited insight into the effectiveness of quality-enhancing interventions for people with PIMD. To foster evidence-based practice, further studies of larger groups and with more robust designs are warranted. The potential differential effects associated with client characteristics and the context of the implementation should also be considered.