Search

Background: People with severe to profound intellectual disabilities experience similar or higher levels of depression than those with more mild intellectual disabilities. Yet, there is an absence of evidence about how to adapt existing psychological therapies for this population. Method: A behavioural activation intervention (BeatIt) for people with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities was adapted for people with severe to profound intellectual disabilities and depression. Key considerations include: (i) beginning with a more in‐depth assessment process; (ii) including the person in session activities and developing a relationship with them; (iii) formulation and the use of film to document the link between activity and mood; and (iv) addressing barriers to change at an individual and inter‐personal level and considering how the carer could support the person's engagement in activity. Results: Successfully adapting BeatIt represents a first step towards gathering evidence about the effectiveness of behavioural activation for people with severe to profound intellectual disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior to the start of the pandemic, adults with intellectual disability (ID) were more likely to experience mental health difficulties and face barriers obtaining mental health care. COVID‐related public health restrictions, combined with heightened challenges to obtain timely mental health care, have served to worsen this situation internationally, with a combination of new onset conditions and worsening mental health for those already struggling. In this narrative review, we summarize literature on the mental health of adults with ID during the COVID‐19 pandemic to describe what is known based on clinician perceptions, existing administrative health data, family and staff perceptions, and self‐report. In addition to noting similarities and differences in findings based on the source of information, we also explored how experiences differed depending on where and when the research was conducted. Based primarily on research conducted during the first six months of the pandemic, there is a consistent finding across sources of increased anxiety, stress, and isolation. This review also explored the delivery of virtual mental health care and the impact of pandemic‐based mental health interventions. There have been very few research studies evaluating clinical care during this time but clinicians have managed to provide supports virtually, which has been evaluated positively by some individuals. This narrative review concludes by identifying gaps in the literature and suggests key directions for future mental health research, policy, and practice efforts. Any mental health efforts now and during pandemic recovery need to have an understanding of how the mental health needs and services for adults with ID have evolved over the course of the pandemic. Further research is needed on the impact of both clinical interventions and other nonclinical efforts on the mental health of people with ID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundMethodResultsConclusionsMoving out of the family home is a key transition for people with intellectual disabilities and their families. Yet there has been little research about parents’ experiences of planning the move of their young adult offspring to residential settings offering 24-hour support.Interviews were conducted with eleven parents whose offspring moved to residential settings within the past 5 years (five fathers; six mothers). They consisted of structured questions about planning their offsprings’ moves and semi-structured questions about parents’ experiences.Content analysis of the structured questions revealed reasons parents began thinking about the moves and routes to finding information. The thematic analysis highlighted the emotional challenges parents faced.The findings highlight the need to address this neglected topic and ensure that practical and emotional support is put in place to plan positive futures, rather than relying on families to use their own initiative or waiting until a crisis occurs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prevalence of anxiety is higher in autistic young people, compared to neurotypical youths. However, the nature of worry in autistic young people is under-researched. Transition from secondary school is a time of change and can be challenging for autistic adolescents. This project explored the content and emotional impact of worries in neurotypical and autistic young people during transition. Twenty-two autistic people and 22 neurotypical people, aged 16–18, were recruited from mainstream schools. Participants completed a novel task to identify and explore the nature of their main worries. The participants' worry frequency and distress levels in relation to their most salient concerns, and their anxiety levels, were measured. Content analysis highlighted similarities and differences between the two groups' worries. Both groups worried about failure and their prospects of further education. Autistic people were more concerned about change and friendship, whereas more salient worries for neurotypical individuals were about work and money. Autistic people were more distressed by their worries than neurotypical individuals. Findings regarding the nature of autistic young people's worries may help inform interventions. Moreover, asking autistic people about their worries as they leave school may help to address their concerns, ease their transition and reduce distress. Autistic young people experience higher levels of anxiety than neurotypical young people. Having worries is part of feeling anxious. This makes it surprising that very little research has looked at the kind of worries autistic young people have. Leaving school, in particular, can be a worrying time for young people. Twenty-two autistic young people and 22 neurotypical young people who were at mainstream secondary schools agreed to take part in the study. They were between 16 and 18 years of age. They were asked to sort through a series of pictures, showing the different types of worries that young people might experience. They were then asked to pick out their four main worries and say how much they thought about each worry and how upset the worry made them. They also completed a questionnaire about their level of anxiety. There were similarities and differences between the autistic and neurotypical young people's worries. Both groups worried about failing and how they might get on in further education. The autistic young people were more worried about change and friendships. Work and money were particular concerns for the neurotypical young people. The autistic young people said that they found their worries more upsetting than the neurotypical young people. Having a better understanding of autistic young people's worries at important points in their lives might mean that more timely help and support can be given to them. Simply knowing what to ask young autistic school leavers about may help them to express unspoken concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Family members are often the main provider of informal support to people with mild intellectual disabilities. In the current study, we explored whether their family-based social capital is prospectively associated with their wellbeing and emotional and behavioral problems. Sixty-nine participants with mild intellectual disabilities and key (proxy reporting) staff members participated in two waves of data collection (T1, T2). Data were collected about family-based social capital (FNM-ID), subjective wellbeing (PWI-ID), and emotional and behavioral problems (ABCL, BPI-01). People who reported less support provision to family members and more reciprocal family support relationships at T1 experienced higher levels of internalizing behavior problems at T2, after accounting for T1 levels of internalizing behavior problems. No other associations were found between earlier family-based social capital dimensions and psychological outcomes at T2. Our study provides initial insights regarding the prospective associations between the family-based social capital of people with mild intellectual disabilities and their wellbeing and emotional and behavioral problems. Future studies should include larger samples to investigate if our preliminary results are replicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the COVID‐19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, many health services were withdrawn from people with learning disabilities, with negative impacts on people's health. What has happened to people's health and healthcare as we move beyond the pandemic? Methods: Access to health services and health status were tracked for 550 UK adults with learning disabilities, using structured online interviews with people with learning disabilities and online surveys with family members or paid carers. Information was provided four times, from Wave 1 (in the winter 2020/2021 'lockdown') to Wave 4 (autumn 2022, over a year after public health protections stopped). Findings: By Wave 4, most people with learning disabilities had had COVID‐19, although high vaccination rates limited the number of people hospitalised. There was little evidence that use of GP services, community nurses, other therapists or annual health checks had increased over time, and at Wave 4 more people were having difficulty getting their medicines. People's health did not substantially improve over time. People with profound and multiple learning disabilities had poorer health and were less likely to be accessing health services. Conclusions: Improvements in access to health services for people with learning disabilities after the pandemic have not yet happened. Accessible Summaries: Many health services stopped for people with learning disabilities in the COVID‐19 pandemic, with a bad impact on people's health. What has happened to people's health and how they use health services through the COVID‐19 pandemic and beyond?People and families told us about the health of over 500 people with learning disabilities living in the United Kingdom four times, from the national lockdown in winter 2020/2021 through to autumn 2022.A lot of people were still not getting the health services they needed after the end of the pandemic, and people's health was not getting better.People with profound and multiple learning disabilities had worse health but were not in contact with health services as much as other people with learning disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To enhance social inclusion of people with (mild) intellectual disabilities, policy tends to focus on increasing their informal supportive networks. Family members, mostly parents, are often the main providers of informal support to people with mild intellectual disabilities. Previous research has shown the utility of social capital as a theoretical framework to examine support in the family relationships of people with mild intellectual disabilities, and has shown that several features of the family‐based social capital of people with mild intellectual disabilities are dependent on support and living arrangements. However, existing research on support and living arrangements does not take the key features of family‐based social capital (i.e., bonding and bridging social capital, reciprocity) into account. Therefore, the aim of the current study is to examine the family‐based social capital of people with mild intellectual disabilities supported in 24‐h residential settings (n = 29) versus outreach support settings (n = 45). All participants were individually interviewed about their family support relationships using the Family Network Method‐Intellectual Disability (FNM‐ID). Data were analyzed quantitatively using social network analyses and group comparisons. No significant differences between the two subgroups were found in the social network measures: the two subgroups did not differ in their experience of bonding and bridging social capital, nor in terms of the experienced reciprocity in their family relationships. However, a few differences in the composition of the family network were found. While people with mild intellectual disabilities in outreach support settings were more likely to include children in their significant family network and to provide support to parents, participants in 24‐h care settings were more likely to report extended family as significant family network members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Having a disability, in particular, an intellectual disability, is associated with Internet non-use. This article explores how people with intellectual disabilities used the Internet across the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic. In April to May 2021, 571 adults with intellectual disabilities were interviewed. Participants most commonly used the Internet for being with family and friends, social media or doing online activities with other people. People who lived with family were the most likely to use social media; people who lived with other people with intellectual disabilities were the least likely. People who self-reported as not lonely were more likely to use the Internet for online activities with others and play video games with others. Social connections were identified as the best thing about the Internet. Many participants chose not to identify a worst thing about Internet use, while others reported issues with technology, online harm and threats to well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Family Network Method – Intellectual Disability (FNM-ID) was used to compare perspectives of people with mild intellectual disability and their support workers on family networks of people with intellectual disability. 138 participants with mild intellectual disability and support workers were interviewed, using the FNM-ID. Paired t-tests were used to examine differences in perspectives. Multiple regression analyses were used to examine divergence in perspectives. People with mild intellectual disability perceived their family networks to be larger and to provide more support than support workers did. Living in a residential setting and having higher levels of externalising behaviour were associated with differences in perspectives, whereas a higher level of internalising behaviour was associated with more similar views. Individuals with intellectual disability and support workers are unlikely to provide the same information about family networks of people with mild intellectual disability. Behavioural and emotional problems were associated with divergence in perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: At the start of the COVID‐19 pandemic, some parents in the Netherlands decided to bring their offspring with intellectual disabilities, who normally live in residential care, home. The present study explored why the mothers decided to bring their offspring home. Method: Interviews were carried out with seven mothers of adults with intellectual disabilities. An interpretative phenomenological approach was used to establish in‐depth accounts of the mothers' experiences. Results: The analysis yielded three overarching themes: (a) Families are indispensable; (b) the complex role of being a mother of a child with intellectual disabilities; and (c) Who is looking out for our offspring during COVID‐19? Conclusions: The mothers experienced a strong sense of wanting to do what was best for their offspring with intellectual disabilities during COVID‐19. The study provides insight into why mothers remain involved in the care for their offspring and the complexity of navigating lifelong care responsibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Almost no research has been published reporting on evaluations of the effectiveness of psychological interventions for people with severe to profound intellectual disabilities and depression. This paper describes the development and initial feasibility testing of an adapted Behavioural Activation therapy (BeatIt2) for this population. Method: Phase 1 of the study examined participant recruitment and willingness to be randomised in the context of a planned Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT). Phase 2 examined the feasibility of delivering the intervention. Results: Twenty adults with a severe or profound intellectual disability and clinically significant depression were recruited to Phase 1 of the study. In Phase 2, there was 100% participant retention for those recruited to the study at 6‐month follow‐up. The BeatIt2 therapy was reported to be acceptable for participants. Conclusion: COVID disruption meant that it was not possible to complete the planned feasibility RCT. The positive findings suggest that additional evaluation of BeatIt2 is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social inclusion has been explored using a wide range of theories and methods. Belonging and reciprocity have been identified as key components of social inclusion. This systematic methodological review identifies and evaluates the theoretical frameworks and qualitative approaches adopted to explore belonging and reciprocity in the lives of adults with intellectual disabilities. Method: A systematic search was conducted across ten databases. Screening and quality appraisal were carried out independently by two researchers, and data were extracted to provide detailed accounts of the theories and methods employed. Results: Seventeen papers met inclusion criteria. Clear conceptualisations of belonging and reciprocity were lacking, and these concepts were rarely the focus of the research. Theoretical and methodological shortcomings across this literature were identified and discussed. Conclusions: More nuanced conceptualisations of belonging and reciprocity may be helpful in future research, to better capture the context and meaning of individual lives and relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differences in perceived emotional support in family networks of people with mild intellectual disability with and without challenging behaviour were explored by using a self-report measure. One hundred and thirty-eight participants (78 men and 60 women, average age 28.2 years old) with mild intellectual disability were interviewed using the Family Network Method -- Intellectual Disability to assess their emotionally supportive family relationships. The instrument maps the perceived emotional support among all the family members in the family networks of people with mild intellectual disability, with and without challenging behaviour. The results suggest that challenging behaviour may not be strongly associated with the family network characteristics and emotional support in family networks of people with mild intellectual disability. A few, and generally small, differences were found between the family networks of people with or without challenging behaviour. However, one moderate sized group difference was found: those with challenging behaviour reported less mutual support in their whole family network. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During the Covid‐19 pandemic, there has been a worldwide increase in the use of digital technology. Many people with learning disabilities have learned new digital skills, taken part in online activities, and kept in touch with family and friends using video calls. However, the experiences of digital participation or nonparticipation for the people with profound and multiple learning disabilities (PMLD) is less understood. Method: Between December 2020 and August 2021, family carers or paid support workers of adults with PMLD completed an online survey around the experiences of the person they care for during the Covid‐19 pandemic, including questions on Internet use. We draw on the findings of this UK‐wide study to explore the digital participation of the people with PMLD during the pandemic. Findings: Around half of the people with PMLD had Internet access at home. Around half of the participants interacted with others on video calls like Facetime or Zoom and most commonly used the Internet for being with family and friends online and streaming TV and films. In the event of another lockdown, 27.5% of the people supporting someone with PMLD said they would like support with technology to make seeing friends and family easier. For some the people, digital participation during the pandemic was not beneficial enough to want to continue when restrictions eased. For others, the new online experiences had the potential to be developed in their postpandemic lives. Conclusion: Around half of the people surveyed participated in digital activities during Covid‐19. Future attention is needed to afford more people opportunities, and respond to access barriers experienced for the people with PMLD and those that support them. Accessible summary: During the Covid‐19 pandemic, a lot of people with learning disabilities used the Internet more than they had done before. Before this research, we did not know very much about how people with profound and multiple learning disabilities might be able to use the Internet.Family carers or paid support workers of people with profound and multiple learning disabilities filled in an online survey about their experiences during the Covid‐19 pandemic. This included how people with profound and multiple learning disabilities used the Internet.The researchers found that around half of people with profound and multiple learning disabilities in the study had Internet access at home. People with profound and multiple learning disabilities mostly used the Internet for being with friends and family online and for streaming TV and films. Around half of people with profound and multiple learning disabilities used video calls (like FaceTime or Zoom).If there is another pandemic, and people cannot go out, more help with technology is needed so that people with profound and multiple learning disabilities can see their family and friends online. This is very important for people who do not live with family.Some people thought digital participation was useful during the pandemic, but they preferred to see people in‐person. For others, being online was a new way of being with other people that they wanted to carry on using or make better. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Approximately 10% of people with intellectual disability display aggressive challenging behaviour, usually due to unmet needs. There are a variety of interventions available, yet a scarcity of understanding about what mechanisms contribute to successful interventions. We explored how complex interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour work in practice and what works for whom by developing programme theories through contexts-mechanism-outcome configurations. Methods: This review followed modified rapid realist review methodology and RAMESES-II standards. Eligible papers reported on a range of population groups (intellectual disability, mental health, dementia, young people and adults) and settings (community and inpatient) to broaden the scope and available data for review. Results: Five databases and grey literature were searched and a total of 59 studies were included. We developed three overarching domains comprising of 11 contexts-mechanism-outcome configurations; 1. Working with the person displaying aggressive challenging behaviour, 2. Relationships and team focused approaches and 3. Sustaining and embedding facilitating factors at team and systems levels. Mechanisms underlying the successful application of interventions included improving understanding, addressing unmet need, developing positive skills, enhancing carer compassion, and boosting staff self-efficacy and motivation. Conclusion: The review emphasises how interventions for aggressive challenging behaviour should be personalised and tailored to suit individual needs. Effective communication and trusting relationships between service users, carers, professionals, and within staff teams is essential to facilitate effective intervention delivery. Carer inclusion and service level buy-in supports the attainment of desired outcomes. Implications for policy, clinical practice and future directions are discussed. Prospero registration number: CRD42020203055. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with intellectual disabilities are at risk of experiencing stigma and require the skills and confidence to deal with stigma in their daily lives. Method: Development and piloting of a 5‐session manualised psychosocial group intervention designed to increase the capacity of people with intellectual disabilities aged 16+ to manage and resist stigma. Ten pre‐existing groups (N = 67) in third sector and education settings participated. Interviews with participants (n = 26), facilitators (n = 9) and significant others (n = 7) 2–4 months after the intervention assessed perceived impact. Results: Perceived benefits of the intervention for participants included increased understanding, improved connections with others, drive for advocacy, increased activity and self‐efficacy, and opportunity to process difficult events and emotions. Differential impact depending on individuals' pre‐existing self‐advocacy skills was noted. Conclusions: This early‐stage study indicates that further evaluation is merited to examine feasibility and outcomes of the STORM intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is relevant in the estimation of improvement in a patient outcome.Aim: To determine the MCID on the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist-Irritability (ABC-I), widely used to measure the effects of intervention for aggressive challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities.Method and Procedures: We utilised distribution and anchor based methods to estimate the ABC-I MCID. We extracted data from 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for meta-analysis. We conducted three online workshops with family carers and professionals to consider meaningful change in case vignettes of increasing severity of aggressive challenging behaviour.Outcomes and Results: We did not find overlap in the range of values between the two approaches. The meta-analysis indicated a range of MCID on the ABC-I (0.05, 4.94) whilst the anchor-based estimation indicated a larger change (6.6, 16.6).Conclusions and Implications: The MCID is essential in interpreting the results from intervention studies. The present work was undertaken as part of a wider programme on the development and testing of a psychosocial intervention for aggressive challenging behaviour, and it is of interest to researchers in justifying how they choose and determine the MCID on the outcome of interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to present data about access to and use of health and social care services by adults with learning disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected in three waves between December 2020 and September 2021 and concerned the use of health and social care services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected at one or more time-points directly from 694 adults with learning disabilities and through separate proxy reports by family carers and paid support staff of another 447 adults with learning disabilities. Findings: Many people with learning disabilities who reported regularly accessing services/supports pre-pandemic were not receiving them during the timeframe of this study. There were indications of increasing access to some services and supports between Wave 2 and 3, but this was not universal. Practical implications: People in Cohort 2, who were likely to have severe/profound learning disabilities, were less frequently reported to access online community activities than people in Cohort 1, which is likely to exacerbate existing social isolation for this cohort and their family carers. Service providers should seek to ensure equitable access to services and activities for all people with learning disabilities in the event of future lockdowns or pandemics. Originality/value: This is the largest longitudinal study about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health and social care services for adults with learning disabilities in the UK. We primarily collected data directly from adults with learning disabilities and worked with partner organisations of people with learning disabilities and family members throughout the study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic meant that it became impossible for many individuals with intellectual disability to access specialist mental health support. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a set of guided self-help resources adapted for delivery on an outreach basis. Design/methodology/approach: The use and impact of the resources were evaluated through: data about downloads and requests for printed materials; interviews with individuals who used the resources; webinars with organisations; family members and support workers who had delivered the resources and an online survey with individuals who had delivered the resources. Findings: The resources had considerable reach, with over 12,555 printed copies requested from across Scotland. The materials were perceived to be relevant and useful, helping individuals to talk about difficulties and to be aware that others were facing similar challenges. Originality/value: The findings highlight the potential long-term value of guided self-help resources to help promote well-being that can be delivered on an outreach basis by family members and social care organisations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Families play an important role in the lives of people with intellectual disability as they do for everyone. However, little research has addressed the views of people with intellectual disability about their families by using self‐report. Individual family members may hold different views about their family relationships. Therefore, we used a social capital theoretical perspective to examine (a) how perceptions of people with mild intellectual disability (MID) about their family support networks compare to those of their family members and (b) what factors are associated with any diverging perceptions. Randomly selected participants with MID (n = 111) and their family members (n = 111) were interviewed individually at their homes using the Family Network Method—Intellectual Disability (FNM‐ID). The FNM‐ID examines how people define their family groups and how they perceive existing supportive relationships within this group. The findings showed that participants with MID perceived that they had somewhat denser family networks (i.e., bonding social capital) than family members perceived them to have and were more likely to report bridging social capital. They reported more relationships that involved them providing support to family members. This difference in estimation was greater when the participant with MID displayed higher levels of externalizing behaviour problems. They also perceived more reciprocity in their relationships with family. No differences were found in the estimated numbers of significant family members and relationships in which support was received. It is concluded that people with MID and their family members have different perceptions on several aspects of the family support network. Family professionals and services should seek the views of people with intellectual disability and their family members when carrying out assessments or organizing supports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health professionals were trained to deliver adapted psychological interventions for depression to people with learning disabilities and depression alongside a supporter. Exploring the delivery of psychological interventions can help increase access to therapy. Method: Twenty‐seven participants took part in six focus groups, and the data were subject to a Framework Analysis. Results: The structure and focus of the manualised therapies, and the use of specific techniques were perceived as key to service‐user engagement. Supporters' involvement was valued by therapists if they had a good relationship and regular contact with the individual they supported. Regular clinical supervision was regarded as vital in understanding their role, assessing progress and delivering the interventions. Conclusions: The findings highlight that health professionals can embrace a focussed therapeutic role and increase access to psychological therapies for people with intellectual disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Families have a significant role in the lives of people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviors. However, it is not clear how actively families are involved when people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviors are living in out-of-home care. This scoping review explored the frequency and type of family involvement in the application of a person-centered approach in the care for people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviors. Authors conducted electronic searches through six databases: Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar (2005 to 2019) and evaluated relevant publications. Based on the 15 articles identified, only five articles report on family involvement. In addition, frequency of contact, and how family is involved appears to differ between different person-centered approaches. More active family involvement in person-centered approaches for people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviors is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present data about the experiences of adults with learning disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic across the UK. Design/methodology/approach: Interviews were conducted with 609 adults with learning disabilities. Family carers and support staff of another 351 adults with learning disabilities completed a proxy online survey. The data were collected between December 2020 and February 2021 and concerned both worries/negatives and anything positive that had happened because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: Social isolation was the most commonly reported worry/negative for adults with learning disabilities, with other frequently reported worries/negatives including: changes to/loss of routine; loss of support/services; and decreased health/well-being/fitness. A large proportion of participants indicated that nothing positive had happened because of COVID-19, but some positives were reported, including: digital inclusion; more time spent with important people; improved health/well-being/fitness; and, a slower pace of life. Practical implications: Future pandemic planning must ensure that adults with learning disabilities are supported to maintain social contact with the people who matter to them and to support their health and well-being (including maintaining access to essential services and activities). Some adults with learning disabilities may benefit from additional support to improve their digital confidence and access. This may in turn enable them to maintain contact with family, friends and support services/activities. Originality/value: This is the largest study about the experiences of adults with learning disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. The authors primarily collected data directly from adults with learning disabilities and worked with partner organisations of people with learning disabilities throughout the study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our STORM intervention was developed for people (16 +) with intellectual disabilities to enhance their capacity to manage and resist stigma. The current study describes the adaptation of STORM for (synchronous) on-line delivery in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. To adapt the manualised face-to-face STORM group intervention for delivery via web-based meeting platforms and to conduct an initial pilot study to consider its acceptability and feasibility. The 5-session STORM intervention was carefully adapted for online delivery. In a pilot study with four community groups (N = 22), outcome, health economics and attendance data were collected, and fidelity of delivery assessed. Focus groups with participants, and interviews with facilitators provided data on acceptability and feasibility. The intervention was adapted with minimal changes to the content required. In the pilot study, 95% of participants were retained at follow-up, 91% attended at least three of the five sessions. Outcome measure completion and fidelity were excellent, and facilitators reported implementation to be feasible. The intervention was reported to be acceptable by participants. When provided with the necessary resources and support, people with intellectual disabilities participate actively in web-delivered group interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]