Scale of Emotional Development - Short: reliability and validity in adults with intellectual disability.

BACKGROUND: Intellectual disability (ID) is often associated with delays in emotional development (ED). The Scale of Emotional Development - Short (SED-S) was developed to assess the level of ED and to adapt treatment and care accordingly. METHODS: In a sample of 724 adults from five study sites in three countries, a confirmatory factor analysis with a one-factor model was conducted on the entire dataset as well as in different subgroups. Furthermore, internal consistency was investigated using Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: The confirmatory factor analysis indicated that a single-factor model fits the SED-S data well. The subgroup analyses revealed good model fit, regardless of the severity of ID and irrespective of sex or the presence of autism spectrum disorder or psychiatric disorders. Internal consistency was excellent for the entire sample (Cronbach's alpha = 0.93) and various subgroups (0.869-0.938). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the SED-S is psychometrically sound and can be used to assess the level of ED in adults with ID.

Brief report comparing the Scale of Emotional Development - Short (SED-S) with other scales for emotional development.

BACKGROUND: Different instruments were devised for assessing emotional development (ED) level in persons with an intellectual disability (ID), that is, the Scale of Emotional Development - Short (SED-S), the Scheme for Appraisal of Emotional Development (SAED), the Scale for Emotional Development - Second Revision (SED-R2 ) and the Schaal voor Emotionele Ontwikkeling - Lukas (SEO-Lukas). The aim of this study was to compare the level of emotional functioning as assessed with the SED-S with the SAED, SED-R2 and SEO-Lukas. METHODS: Emotional development was measured in adults with ID with the SED-S (N = 186) and the SAED (n = 85), the SED-R2 (n = 50) and the SEO-Lukas (n = 51). Correlation analysis and Cohen's kappas were calculated between the SED-S and the three respective scales. Internal consistencies (Cronbach's alpha) of the four scales were determined. RESULTS: The SED-S results correlated most with the SEO-Lukas (γ = 1; кω = 0.936) followed by the SAED (γ = 0.809; кω = 0.343) and least by the SED-R2 (γ = 0.665; кω = 0.182). The stage of ED assessed with the SED-S was lower than the ED results measured with the SAED, but higher than with the SED-R2 and most similar to the SEO-Lukas. Cronbach's alphas were high, ranging from 0.853 to 0.975. CONCLUSIONS: Given the respective differences between the scales, the SED-S may equalise the results as compared with previous versions.

Aligning quality of life and guidelines for off-label psychotropic drugs in adults with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour.

Introduction: Adults with intellectual disabilities have an increased vulnerability to mental health problems and challenging behaviour. In addition to psychotherapeutic or psychoeducational methods, off-label pharmacotherapy, is a commonly used treatment modality. Objective: The aim of this study was to establish evidence-based guideline recommendations for the responsible prescription of off-label psychotropic drugs, in relation to Quality of Life (QoL). Method: A list of guidelines was selected, and principles were established based on international literature, guideline review and expert evaluation. The Delphi method was used to achieve consensus about guideline recommendations among a 58-member international multidisciplinary expert Delphi panel. Thirty-three statements were rated on a 5-point Likert-scale, ranging from totally disagree to totally agree, in consecutive Delphi rounds. When at least 70% of the participants agreed (score equal or higher than 4), a statement was accepted . Statements without a consensus were adjusted between consecutive Delphi rounds based on feedback from the Delphi panel. Results: Consensus was reached on 4 general:the importance of non-pharmaceutical treatments, comprehensive diagnostics and multidisciplinary treatment. Consensus was reached in 4 rounds on 29 statements. No consensus was reached on 4 statements concerning: freedom-restricting measures, the treatment plan, the evaluation of the treatment plan, and the informed consent. Conclusion: The study led to recommendations and principles for the responsible prescription - aligned with the QoL perspective - of off-label psychotropic drugs for adults with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour. Extensive discussion is needed regarding the issues on which there was no consensus to furthering the ongoing development of this guideline.