Making a difference - the impact of the Confidential Inquiry into premature deaths of people with learning disabilities.

Accessible summary In our research, we looked at why people with learning disabilities sometimes live shorter lives than other people. We were told about the deaths of 247 people with learning disabilities. We looked at what happened to these people before they died., We found that the professionals who were supporting these people learnt a lot from our research. This led to some changes in how they support people with learning disabilities., We have also seen that people are using the findings to improve the care and services for people with learning disabilities in the places they live., The Department of Health and NHS England are some of the organisations working to make sure doctors and nurses listen to what our research said., Summary The Confidential Inquiry into premature deaths of people with learning disabilities ( CIPOLD) was commissioned by the Department of Health in England in 2010 to investigate the avoidable or premature deaths of people with learning disabilities through retrospective reviews of deaths. Both the process of conducting CIPOLD and the findings of the study itself made an impact on the way in which professionals thought about issues relating to people with learning disabilities and led to changes in policy and practice. Much of the impact of CIPOLD came from arming practitioners, family carers, people with learning disabilities and policy makers with the research findings and encouraging them to take on the mantle of change from there, for example, by increasing the provision of training or reviewing their current practice. There were a number of challenges that the research team faced. First, they needed to ensure the assiduous recording of any impact that took place throughout the duration of the research and beyond. Secondly, they were careful to make sure that as far as possible, professionals were involved and that it was a learning experience for them from which they had something to gain. Thirdly, self-reflexivity on the part of the research team was required in order for them to understand where their own strengths and limitations lay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]