Search

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic has caused many adults with intellectual/developmental disabilities (IDD) to lose their daily routines and social support, and as a result, many adults with IDD are increasingly reliant on their family caregivers. Siblings often play a crucial support role for their brothers and sisters with IDD. As such, this study aimed to describe the experiences of adult siblings of people with IDD during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: The Sibling Collaborative worked with researchers to codesign an online survey, completed by 91 people, exploring sibling supports and concerns during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The survey also aimed to identify helpful resources for siblings during this time. Results: The results showed that the majority of siblings are supporting their brother or sister with IDD during the COVID‐19 pandemic and are concerned about the health and well‐being of their brother/sister. The most common concern related to disruption of their brother's or sister's routine and activities. Although responses of older and younger siblings did not differ from each other, siblings whose brother or sister with IDD lived with family had some unique concerns relative to those whose siblings no longer lived with family. Siblings described how their own self‐care and relationships with others, as well as support for their brother/sister, were particularly helpful during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Conclusions: Siblings are providing key support to their brother or sister with IDD during the COVID‐19 pandemic, and they too must be supported. Siblings should be included in efforts to disseminate resources targeting people with IDD and their feedback and input must be obtained. It is also important to include sibling mental wellness as caregiver supports are created and implemented. More research is needed to further understand how to support sibling caregivers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has heightened concerns about immunological protection, especially for individuals with inborn errors of immunity (IEI). While COVID-19 vaccines elicit strong immune responses in healthy individuals, their effectiveness in IEI patients remains unclear, particularly against new viral variants and vaccine formulations. This uncertainty has led to anxiety, prolonged self-isolation, and repeated vaccinations with uncertain benefits among IEI patients. Despite some level of immune response from vaccination, the definition of protective immunity in IEI individuals is still unknown. Given their susceptibility to severe COVID-19, strategies such as immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT) and monoclonal antibodies have been employed to provide passive immunity, and protection against both current and emerging variants. This review examines the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines and antibody-based therapies in IEI patients, their capacity to recognize viral variants, and the necessary advances required for the ongoing protection of people with IEIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic has been felt by all groups in society and people with intellectual disability are especially vulnerable due to underlying conditions/health problems, multi-morbidity, limitations in understanding, frailty and social circumstances. This places people with intellectual disability, their families and carers at increased risk of stress and in need of support. To update and chart the evidence of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with intellectual disability, their families and carers reported within the research in 2021. A scoping review of research published in 2021 across 7 databases. 84 studies met the inclusion criteria, and the findings highlight people with intellectual disability are at a greater risk to COVID-19 health outcomes due to underlying health concerns and access issues. The effects of COVID-19 can be seen from a personal, social and health perspective for people with intellectual disability, their carers and families. However, COVID-19 did have some unanticipated benefits such as: less demand on time, greater opportunity to engage with people of value and building resilience. COVID-19 presents many challenges but for people with intellectual disability compounding existing obstacles encountered in access issues, service provision and supports available. There is a need to identify and describe the experiences of people with intellectual disability, their families and carers in the medium-long term during COVID-19. Greater supports and evidence of effective interventions to promote health, deliver services and support individual with intellectual disability is needed as there is little evidence of clinical care for people with intellectual disability during COVID-19. During pandemics the perspectives of people with intellectual disability, their carers and service providers are central to addressing systemic health care inequalities and poor-quality person-centred care. Greater collaboration is needed to learn from pandemics in terms of health and social care policy improvements. There remains a need for large scale studies that are representative of the broad spectrum of the intellectual disability population and examine Long-COVID in this group of people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Introduction: Since May 2021, sotrovimab has been available in Italy for early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to prevent disease progression. However, some in vitro studies have questioned its efficacy on Omicron variants. Therefore, we aim to further investigate the efficacy of sotrovimab in real-life settings. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective study collecting medical records of people with SARS-CoV-2 infection evaluated in the infectious diseases units of Sassari, Foggia, and Bari, Italy. We included people with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with sotrovimab and people who did not receive any treatment in 2022. The primary study outcome was to evaluate the efficacy of sotrovimab in reducing disease progression (defined as the necessity of starting oxygen supplementation) and COVID-19-related death. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the safety of sotrovimab. (3) Results: We included 689 people; of them, 341 were treated with sotrovimab, while 348 did not receive any treatment. Overall, we registered 161 (23.4%) disease progressions and 65 (9.4%) deaths, with a significant difference between treated and not-treated people (p < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression, increasing age [OR for ten years increasing age 1.23 (95%CI 1.04–1.45)] was associated with a higher risk of disease progression. In addition, cardiovascular disease [OR 1.69 (1.01–2.80), fever [OR 3.88 (95%CI 2.35–6.38)], and dyspnea [OR 7.24 (95%CI 4.17–12.58)] were associated with an increased risk of disease progression. In contrast, vaccination [OR 0.21 (95%CI 0.12–0.37)] and sotrovimab administration [OR 0.05 (95%CI 0.02–0.11)] were associated with a lower risk of developing severe COVID-19. Regarding mortality, people with older age [OR for ten years increasing age 1.36 (95%CI 1.09–1.69)] had a higher risk of death. In addition, in the multivariate analysis, cardiovascular disease lost statistical significance, while people on chemotherapy for haematological cancer [OR 4.07 (95%CI 1.45–11.4)] and those with dyspnea at diagnosis [OR 3.63 (95%CI 2.02–6.50)] had an increased risk of death. In contrast, vaccination [OR 0.37 (95%CI 0.20–0.68)] and sotrovimab treatment [OR 0.16 (95%CI 0.06–0.42)] were associated with lower risk. Only two adverse events were reported; one person complained of diarrhoea a few hours after sotrovimab administration, and one had an allergic reaction with cutaneous rash and itching. (4) Conclusions: Our study showed that sotrovimab treatment was associated with a reduction of the risk of disease progression and death in SARS-CoV-2-infected people, 70% of whom were over 65 years and a with high vaccination rate, with excellent safety. Therefore, our results reinforce the evidence about the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab during the Omicron era in a real-world setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study explored the differences in clinical characteristics between the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) and SARS-CoV-2 BA.2 variant (Omicron) infections in patients younger than age 65 years, to improve identification of these diseases and better respond to the current epidemic. Methods: Data from 127 patients with the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) diagnosed between May and July of 2009 and 3,265 patients with Omicron diagnosed between March and May of 2022 were collected. Using a 1:2 match based on age (difference <2 years), sex, and underlying diseases, data from 115 patients with the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) infection (H1N1 group) and 230 patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 infection (Omicron group) were analyzed. The clinical manifestations were compared between the groups, logistic regression was performed to identify possible independent risk factors for each group, and multiple linear regression was used to analyze the factors predicting time for nucleic acid negativization (NAN). Results: The median [interquartile range] age of the two groups was 21 [11, 26] years. Compared with the H1N1 group, the Omicron group had: lower white blood cell counts and C-reactive protein levels; less fever, nasal congestion, sore throat, cough, sputum, and headache; and more olfactory loss, muscle soreness, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) abnormalities. Patients in the Omicron group used fewer antibiotics and antiviral drugs, and the time for NAN was longer (17 [14,20] VS 4 [3,5] days, P<0.001). Logistic regression showed that fever, cough, headache, and increased white blood cell count were more strongly correlated with the H1N1 group, while muscle soreness and LDH abnormalities were more strongly correlated with the Omicron group. Fever (B 1.529, 95% confidence interval [0.149,2.909], P=0.030) significantly predicted a longer time for NAN in patients with Omicron. Discussion: There are significant differences in clinical characteristics between SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection and the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) infection. Recognition of these differences has important implications for clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality services for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities and mental health needs (IDD-MH) requires timely access to services that are responsive to their needs and preferences. This study explores virtual service delivery from the perspectives of family caregivers of persons IDD-MH during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recorded clinical interviews from 577 family caregivers, collected as part of START (Systemic, Therapeutic, Assessment, Resources, and Treatment) service implementation between March and July 2020, were retrospectively analyzed using a qualitative content analysis approach. Four factors influenced quality: accessibility of teleservices for persons with IDD-MH; confluence of demands on the caregiver setting; telecommunications infrastructure; and adaptability of services. Perceptions fluctuated with the interaction of these factors. While many may benefit from teleservices during future public health emergencies, providers should consider individual, family, community, and service system factors to ensure teleservice access, appropriateness, and accountability for family caregivers of persons with IDD-MH. [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]

Copyright of Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Zorg aan Mensen met Veerstandelijke Beperkingen is the property of Uitgeverij van Gorcum and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic has significantly impacted family caregivers of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). This study evaluated a virtual course for family caregivers from across Canada, focused on supporting the mental health and well‐being of adults with IDD and their families. The evaluation examined the feasibility and acceptability of the course, as well as the impact of the intervention on participants' overall health and well‐being. Methods: The 6‐week virtual course, informed by a parallel Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) course for service providers, combined didactic instruction with applied activities. A total of 126 family caregiver course participants consented to be part of the research evaluation delivered over three cycles between October 2020 and April 2021. Attendance was measured at each weekly session. Satisfaction was assessed weekly and post‐program. Learning, self‐efficacy, and well‐being were assessed pre‐ and post‐course, and again at follow‐up (8 weeks post‐course). Mixed‐effects models assessed changes between and within individuals across time. Results: Participants had consistent attendance, low‐dropout rates, and reported high satisfaction, with 93% of participants reporting that their expectations for the course were met. Compared with pre‐course, participants reported improved self‐efficacy and well‐being post‐course, which were maintained at follow‐up. Conclusions: An interactive and applied virtual education course delivered to a large group of family caregivers of adults with IDD was both feasible and acceptable. It positively impacted participants' well‐being by offering much needed mental health support and creating a peer‐led community of practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since COVID-19 has become a pandemic, everyday life has seen dramatic changes affecting individuals, families, and children with and without autism. Among other things, these changes entail more time at home, digital forms of communication, school closures, and reduced support and intervention. Here, we assess the effects of the pandemic on quality of life for school-age autistic and neurotypical children and adolescents. First, we provide a comprehensive review of the current relevant literature. Next, we report original data from a survey conducted in several countries, assessing activities, well-being, and social life in families with autism, and their changes over time. We focus on differences between children with and without autism from within the same families, and on different outcomes for children with high- or low-functioning autism. While individuals with autism scored lower in emotional and social functioning than their neurotypical siblings, both groups of children showed comparable decreases in well-being and increases in anxiety, compared to before the pandemic. By contrast, decreases in adaptability were significantly more pronounced in autistic children and adolescents compared to neurotypical children and adolescents. Overall, although individual families reported some positive effects of pandemic restrictions, our data provide no evidence that these generalize across children and adolescents with autism, or even just to individuals with high-functioning autism. We discuss the increased challenges that need to be addressed to protect children and adolescents' well-being under pandemic conditions, but also point out potentials in the present situation that could be used towards social participation and success in older children and young adults with autism. [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]

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]

Aim: This study analysed the impact that COVID‐19 and the response measures implemented by the Spanish Government have had on families of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Method: Data on 323 family members (M = 52.3 years old; SD = 10.5) were collected through an online survey, which was focused on analysing difficulties experienced and service provision during lockdown. Results: Many families (66.3%) have seen their level of stress increased during lockdown because of, among other reasons, a greater burden of care. Difficulties were associated with the closure and changes in disability‐related services. Families of people with extensive support needs have generally experienced greater difficulties. Conclusion: Support services should have been considered essential services during lockdown. The failure to receive support has resulted in excessive burden on families, who had to assume a multitude of roles to support their family member with intellectual and developmental disability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study examined factors that predict stress level and life satisfaction among adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities during the COVID‐19 pandemic and the role of social support. Method: From a larger study about the experiences during the pandemic of 2028 individuals with and without disabilities, 181 adults with intellectual or developmental disabilities (or proxy) responded. Results: Most respondents with intellectual or developmental disabilities (92.8%) reported negative impacts from the pandemic, with 55.2% of the 96 employed pre‐pandemic reporting impacted employment, including job loss. The negative impact of the pandemic was a significant predictor of stress level; social support was related to reduced stress. Stress level and the negative impact of the pandemic were inversely related to life satisfaction; social support was positively related to life satisfaction. Social support partially mediated the association between stress level and life satisfaction. Discussion: Comprehensive services and social support systems are needed to combat the impact of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify how inclusive research teams use technology during the research process that could support remote collaboration during public health emergencies like the COVID‐19 pandemic. Method: We searched three databases and conducted a hand search. Two independent reviewers screened 1498 abstracts and titles for inclusion criteria; 81 full text articles were further reviewed; 47 were included. We extracted information about each type of technology, categorised technology used during the research process, and documented described accommodations. Results: We identified 47 articles and 94 examples of technologies used by people with intellectual and developmental disabilities throughout the research process: team formation and team function (38), data collection (19), data analysis (17) and dissemination (20). Conclusions: Technology use by team members with intellectual and developmental disabilities demonstrates promise for remote research collaborations during public health and climate emergencies and teams with members living in diverse locations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The recent COVID‐19 pandemic led to widespread international restrictions, severely impacting on health and social care services. For many individuals with an intellectual disability (ID) this meant reduced access to services and support for them and their carers. Aim: The aim of this study was to gain insight into the ways parents of adults with ID coped during the first 2020 lockdown period. Methods: Eight parents of adults with ID were interviewed. The recordings of these interviews were subjected to a thematic analysis. Results: Four main themes were identified: powerless and unappreciated; coping under lockdown; support; and the impact of lockdown on well‐being. Conclusions: The parents of adults with ID who made up our sample reported that they received little support from services and experienced a sense of powerlessness. Nevertheless, they were open to accepting support from family and friends and showed remarkable resilience. These findings are discussed in the light of the Willner et al. (2020) survey results on parental mental health and coping, and suggestions for future service provision during pandemic conditions are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People with an intellectual disability are a vulnerable group during COVID-19 due to multi-morbidity, frailty, underlying conditions/health problems, social circumstances and limitations in understanding. This places them at greater risk of more severe outcomes from COVID-19. To chart the evidence of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with intellectual disability and their carers reported in the research. A scoping review method was used to review literature published across eight databases in 2020 and included manual searches of reference lists of included articles. Sixteen studies were selected for inclusion. The findings highlight that professionals, people with intellectual disability and their carers were keen to comply with pandemic related public health guidance. However, implementing infection prevention and control measures in certain contexts for people with intellectual disability was challenging. Thereby a rights-based, person-centred approach to care is essential and professionals need to extend their understanding and practice of collaborative working to include people with intellectual disability and their family/carers. The findings highlight that compliance with public health guidance and infection control measures can be difficult for people with intellectual disability to implement. There is limited good quality robust research on COVID-19 and people with intellectual disability and/or their carers experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]