Search

Background: People with intellectual disabilities are more likely to experience sleep problems, which can affect quality of life, physical health, mental health and well‐being. Methods: An integrative literature review was conducted to investigate what is known about behavioural sleep disturbances in people with an intellectual disability. The search used the following databases: Scopus, PsycInfo and Cinahl, to find papers published since 2015. Results: Within intellectual disability research, sleep appears as a common issue due to its high prevalence, negative relationships with an individual's physical and mental health, their quality of life, and impact of sleep problems on family or carers. The growing evidence base appears to support the use of behavioural, lifestyle and pharmacological interventions to improve sleep in people with an intellectual disability. Conclusion: A wide array of literature provides evidence that people with intellectual disabilities are affected by and need support with their sleep. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic poses risks to the quality of life (QoL) of relatives of individuals with intellectual disabilities. This paper investigates relatives' QoL and associated risk and buffering factors before and during the pandemic. Method: Surveys were administered to three samples of relatives in the Netherlands in 2019 (N = 105) and during the first waves of COVID‐19 in June (N = 207) and October 2020 (N = 332). Associations between QoL and care burden, care competence, social support, and resilience, and changes over time were analysed using (logistic) regressions. Results: No significant changes in overall QoL nor its domains were found. Care burden was negatively associated with QoL and increased during the pandemic. Care competence was lower than in 2019. Competence, social support, and resilience were positively associated with QoL. Conclusions: Although relatives' QoL remained stable, the pandemic poses non‐negligible risks to their wellbeing. It is, therefore, crucial to provide relatives with adequate support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID‐19 has very publicly had profound impacts on the health system of every country in the world. Over 4.5 million people have lost their lives. School closures worldwide where up to 1.6 billion of the world's children have been out of school, are also prominent in world news. Behind these public impacts are the families. In this paper, we focus on the experiences of families with people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) through analysis of two data sets: the emerging research literature and contributions from our author team who have lived experience of intellectual and developmental disability in the context of COVID‐19. From these two data sets, we discern five themes of the impact of the pandemic: on health, on education, on services and supports, on families and finally on relationships beyond the family. We conclude with lessons from those living with intellectual and developmental disabilities, the carers and the individuals themselves to draw implications for supporting families in the context of disability during future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible Summary: In the past 30 years, many people with (intellectual) learning disabilities have been moved out of large "institutions" and into their own home in their local communityThese people are now often between 30 and 50 years oldWe asked people with learning disabilities aged between 30 and 50 and who are living in their local community what things, including work, that they enjoyed doingWe asked people with learning disabilities aged between 30 and 50 and who are living in their local community whether they felt that they could make decisions about their lifeWe found out the things that make their life good, and also what might stop people enjoying their lifeWe learnt that people with learning disabilities should receive more support to assist them before they retireWe learnt that people with learning disabilities still need more support and choice around who they live with Background: This study investigated perceived quality of life (QoL) of community‐dwelling middle‐aged adults (30–50 years) with an intellectual disability and/or developmental disability living in rural or urban areas in New South Wales and Queensland, Australia. The specific aim of the current paper was to provide a descriptive evidence base of QoL and its specific domains by various key demographic characteristics of middle‐aged individuals. This cohort is likely to have either experienced or reached adulthood during and after large‐scale deinstitutionalisation in Australia. Methods and procedures: A cross‐sectional design was utilised, based on the QoL‐Q survey, testing domains of satisfaction; Competence/Productivity; Empowerment/Independence; and social belonging/community integration. The survey included demographic questions and was distributed to participants through disability support agencies across two states. The final sample included 291 respondents. Results: The overall QoL‐Q scores ranged from 3.0 to 29.5 (Mean = 20.4, SD, 4.1), with considerable variation in mean scores both across and within domains. The two demographic areas that showed greatest predictive value for QoL were work status and accommodation issues. The loss of agency and control in choice of co‐residents influenced perceived QoL for empowerment and independence domain of QoL‐Q. Conclusions: The findings highlight QoL issues associated with policy decisions and support programmes for middle‐aged adults. The two key recommendations arising from the project are that future planning for post‐retirement or reduced working hours needs to commence at a much younger age than currently expected, and more attention needs to focus on facilitating individual decision‐making and choice within shared accommodation options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accessible summary: Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) is a therapy to help people manage their feelings.We ran a DBT group for people with an intellectual disability. The group seemed to help people feel better and manage their feelings, even after the group ended.The group was 2 years ago. We talked to three people who went to the group to see what people still remembered from the group and if DBT was still helping them.We think having a top‐up session might help people to remember and practise ideas from the group. Background: This paper reports quantitative and qualitative follow‐up data from three participants who attended a Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) group for people with an intellectual disability. Materials and Methods: Quantitative data regarding psychological well‐being, psychological distress (measured using the Psychological Therapies Outcome Scales; PTOS) and quality of life (measured using the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales—Learning Disability; HONOS‐LD) are reported for pre‐group, post‐group and at 6‐month and 2‐year follow‐up. Interviews were conducted with participants post‐group and at 2‐year follow‐up. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Improvements in scores on measures of psychological well‐being, psychological distress and quality of life appear to be maintained at 6‐month follow‐up, but scores at 2‐year follow‐up suggest a return to baseline. Qualitative self‐report data suggest a number of interesting ways participants adapted and individualised techniques from the group, as well as suggesting possible barriers to maintaining change in the longer term. Conclusions: Clinical implications are considered to improve effectiveness of similar interventions, as well research implications in order to improve knowledge about the longer term impact of group DBT interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background This paper focuses on the transition to supported employment for people with intellectual disabilities paying particular attention to the impact of job breakdown on psychological well-being; an issue often omitted from studies. Materials and Methods Forty-nine people with intellectual disabilities were interviewed within 3 months of entering supported employment and 9–12 months later. Data collection involved in-depth interviews with people with intellectual disabilities, their carers and employers and completion of a self-report measure of depression and anxiety (an adapted form of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and a self-report measure of quality of life (the ComQol). Results By time of the follow-up interviews, 13 of the 49 jobs had broken down. Analysis of scores measuring quality of life, anxiety and depression showed no effect for loss of employment. However, interviews with participants indicated that job loss had a considerable impact on those affected. Conclusions There were a wide range of reasons for job breakdown, many of which were particular to the circumstances of people with intellectual disabilities. Although job breakdown does not have an impact of anxiety or depression many participants found job loss traumatic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health status is an important domain of quality of life of people with intellectual disabilities. This paper describes the development of a self-report health status measure for use with people with intellectual disabilities living in staffed community-based accommodation, and reports preliminary reliability data for the schedule.Question and response items were adapted from a well-established measure (SF-36) used in the general population incorporating subscales such as General Health, Physical Functioning, Bodily Pain, Vitality, Mental Health, and Sensory Functioning. A variety of closed and open response formats were used based on the growing literature examining methods for interviewing people with intellectual disabilities.Internal reliability and response consistency were investigated. Reliability for Physical Functioning, General Health and Bodily Pain was reasonable, but was unsatisfactory for Sensory Functioning, and Mental Health.The findings are discussed in light of the challenge of eliciting reliable responses from people with intellectual disabilities. Question methodologies can be built upon in further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous countries have recognized the need for improved surveillance data on the health of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Federal agencies need additional information about the prevalence and health of persons with IDD to guide decisions about policies and programs. Without such data, health inequities and health needs of people with IDD can go unrecognized and be ignored, and resources may be misdirected. The priority areas for needed information, however, have not been well documented. To determine priorities for health data for persons with IDD, we conducted focus groups with three types of stakeholders from around the United States: researchers/practitioners, adults with IDD, and family members. Focus group dialogue was coded for themes and compared across stakeholder categories. Themes common to all groups included valuing people with IDD and respecting their self‐determination; affirming the need for data including longitudinal data; holding a holistic view of physical, mental, social, and sexual health; and access to quality health care, medications, and assistive equipment. Each group also contributed unique ideas such as importance of trust for disclosure of private information, stereotypes and discrimination, and social influences on health. Stakeholders identified specific health conditions to monitor, including COVID‐19. Findings have implications for establishing a health surveillance data system and for practice more generally. Health needs to be considered holistically, including physical, mental, social, and sexual health. A data framework needs to extend beyond a cross‐sectional comparative framework to include longitudinal tracking and monitoring conditions unique to persons with IDD. People with IDD may not trust nor disclose sensitive information about their disability and health to support persons and surveyors, which has implications for under‐reporting of prevalence of IDD and validity of proxy‐reporting. Input from multiple stakeholders is fundamental to developing a usable and relevant data collection system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issue Addressed: Intergenerational mentoring is emerging as a way to provide meaningful engagement and improve wellbeing for older adults in retirement. However, there is little, if any, Australian research concerning the benefits for older mentors involved in such mentoring. This study aims to investigate the experiences of older male mentors involved in an intergenerational mentoring program with young men with intellectual disability and identify any benefits to physical and mental health and generativity.Methods: This study used a mixed methods concurrent triangulation design. Quantitative outcomes data were collected pre and postintervention using the SF-36 and Loyola Generativity Scale. Qualitative data were collected using a single-interview approach. Mentors and mentees took part in a 6-month mentoring program based in Australian Men's Sheds.Results: No significant changes were seen in physical health and generativity. Investigation of mental health scores revealed a significant improvement in scores on the mental health subscale. Qualitative analysis revealed the main theme as "Learning together through a relational and practical routine" and four sub-themes.Conclusion: Men's Shed intergenerational mentoring programs present an environment for older, retired men to express generativity, improve their mental health and bond with younger generations.So what? The potential wellbeing implications for older men through intergenerational mentoring should form the basis of future research and intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ageing of people with intellectual disability, accompanied with consequences like dementia, challenges intellectual disability‐care staff and creates a need for supporting methods, with Dementia Care Mapping (DCM) as a promising possibility. This study examined the effect of DCM on the quality of life of older people with intellectual disability. Methods: We performed a quasi‐experimental study in 23 group homes for older people with intellectual disability in the Netherlands, comparing DCM (n = 113) with care‐as‐usual (CAU; n = 111). Using three measures, we assessed the staff‐reported quality of life of older people with intellectual disability. Results: DCM achieved no significantly better or worse quality of life than CAU. Effect sizes varied from 0.01 to −0.22. Adjustments for covariates and restriction of analyses to people with dementia yielded similar results. Conclusion: The finding that DCM does not increase quality of life of older people with intellectual disability contradicts previous findings and deserves further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We know little about the correlates of mental health problems in youth with severe and profound intellectual disability (ID), as most research includes these youth within larger samples that include greater proportions of mild and moderate disability. The purpose of the current study was to identify the child, family and psychosocial characteristics that were associated with the presence of psychiatric diagnoses and maladaptive behaviour in youth with severe ID. Methods Participants were 141 parents of youth with severe or profound levels of ID, 4 to 18 years of age. The mean age of children was 11.04 years ( SD = 3.38), with 68% male and 39% with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Parents completed a primarily online survey of child and family characteristics, negative life events, family quality of life and their own mental health. Results Logistic regression analyses revealed that youth with a psychiatric diagnosis had higher levels of adaptive behaviour and experienced more negative life events than youth without psychiatric diagnosis, while the presence of clinically significant maladaptive behaviour was related to higher levels of adaptive behaviour, parents' mental health problems and lower family quality of life. Child age, gender, ASD status and financial hardship were not related to either outcome variable. Conclusions Youth with severe and profound ID who experience psychosocial stressors are more likely reported to have mental health problems than youth without such stressors. It is likely that a combination of child and family based interventions, along with with policies that address larger systemic issues of social adversity, are needed to promote mental health and treat psychopathology when it arises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Social support has been identified as a major protective factor in preventing mental health problems and also as a major contributor to quality of life. People with intellectual disabilities (ID) have been identified as having limited social support structures. Interventions have been focused on promoting their social presence and integration. However, previous studies have shown that this does not always lead to the formation of social relationships. To date few studies have looked at how having an ID leads to impoverished social networks. This study aimed to do this by contrasting the social relationships of people with physical disabilities (PD) and people with ID. Methods Two groups of participants were recruited; 30 people with mild ID and 17 people with PD. Social and functional support networks were assessed, in addition to life experiences. Between and within group differences were then explored statistically. Results Adults with ID had more restricted social networks than PD, despite being involved in more activities. Social support for adults with ID was mainly provided by family and carers and few relationships with non-disabled people were identified. In contrast adults with PD had larger social networks than had been reported in the mainstream literature and had a balance of relationships with disabled and non-disabled people. Conclusions The results suggest that there are additional processes attached to having an ID, which lead to continued impoverished lifestyles. The findings also endorse other work that suggests being physically integrated and engaged in a wide range of activities does not guarantee good social and emotional support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research on parental well-being has focused largely on Down syndrome and autism; however, fragile X syndrome is likely to pose different challenges for parents compared with these other diagnostic conditions. Moreover, there is considerable variability among youth with fragile X syndrome; for example, 25% to 33% of affected youth meet criteria for a co-morbid diagnosis of autism. It is likely that parents of youth with fragile X syndrome will experience different degrees and patterns of stress, depending on whether their offspring do or do not have a co-morbid diagnosis of autism. In the present study, we compared mothers of three groups of young males on measures of psychological well-being and stress: those with fragile X syndrome and a co-morbid diagnosis of autism; those with fragile X syndrome alone; and those with Down syndrome. Method: The sample consisted of mothers of adolescent and young adult males with fragile X syndrome and co-morbid autism ( n = 9), fragile X syndrome alone ( n = 19), and Down syndrome ( n = 19). We screened all youth for autism using the Autism Behavior Checklist, which was completed by mothers, fathers and teachers, and the youth who scored above the suggested cut-off were evaluated by a licensed psychologist to determine autism status. The three groups of youth did not differ in chronological age (16.4, 15.8 and 16.0 years, respectively) or non-verbal mental age (3.8, 3.9 and 3.8 years, respectively). Several self-report measures were completed by mothers. These measures assessed current mental health status (e.g. the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale), perceptions of their son's and families functioning (e.g. the Positive Affect Index, which measures closeness felt by the mother to her son and also reciprocated closeness felt by the son towards the mother, as perceived by the mother), and approach to coping with their son's disability [e.g. the Multidimensional Coping Inventory (COPE), which measures emotion-focused and problem-solving focused coping]. Results: The results suggest that fragile X syndrome creates more challenges to maternal psychological well-being than Down syndrome, and that the combination of fragile X syndrome and autism can be particularly challenging. Differences among groups, however, were manifested mainly as concerns about the affected son and about relationships within the family rather than as lower levels of mental health. Thus, mothers of sons with fragile X syndrome, regardless of the son's autism status, reported more pessimism about the son's future and more conflict within the family than mothers of sons with Down syndrome. Additionally, mothers of sons with fragile X syndrome and co-morbid autism reported lower levels of reciprocated closeness than the other two groups of mothers. Conclusion: We consider possible causes of these maternal differences, the implications for clinical practice, needs for future research, and the importance of understanding child and contextual factors as well as the dynamics leading to these differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]