Search

Background: The Draft Mental Health Bill proposes removal of both intellectual disability and autism from Section 3 of the Mental Health Act for England and Wales (MHA). This would lead to people with intellectual disability (PwID) and/or autism could not be detained beyond 28 days, in the absence of diagnosed co-occurring mental illness. Aim: To obtain views of psychiatrists working with PwID in England and Wales regarding the proposed MHA changes. This study focusses specifically on the impact on PwID. Methods: A cross-sectional online mixed methodology survey of Likert and free-text response questions was developed, to ascertain perceptions of proposed legislative changes to the MHA. A non-discriminatory exponential snowballing technique leading to non-probability sampling was used to disseminate the survey. Quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney and Fisher's exact tests. Thematic analysis was conducted on free text responses. Results: A total of 82 psychiatrists (33%) from approximately 250 eligible completed the survey. Nearly two-thirds (64%) reported good awareness of the proposed changes, with over half (55%) reporting disagreement with the changes. Psychiatrists working in inpatient settings for PwID reported increased awareness of the changes, less agreement with the reforms, and increased expectations of the reforms having negative unintended consequences, compared to their peers working exclusively in the community. Consultants reported greater disagreement with the changes compared to their non-consultant peers. Qualitative analysis identified five main themes: impact on diagnosis and treatment, seeking alternative options, introducing inequities, resources, and meeting holistic care goals through the Care, Education and Treatment Reviews (CETR) process. Conclusion: Psychiatrists working with PwID report widespread disagreement with the proposed changes to the MHA for PwID, with greater levels of disagreement among those working in inpatient services. Caution with respect to the proposed changes, and monitoring of the impact of the changes if implemented, is advised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The draft Mental Health Bill, which amends the Mental Health Act 1983 for England and Wales, proposes protections for people with intellectual disability and/or autism (ID/A) to prevent detention in hospital in the absence of mental illness. This editorial critically appraises the positive impact and unintended consequences of the proposed reforms for people with ID/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adults with learning disability face multiple adversities, but evidence on their needs and primary care experiences is limited., Aim: To compare the characteristics and primary care experiences of adults reporting learning disability with those who did not., Design and Setting: This was an analysis of the 2022 General Practice Patient Survey, a national probability sample survey conducted in 2022 with people registered with NHS primary care in England., Method: This analysis reports descriptive profiles, weighted and with 95% confidence intervals. Logistic regression models adjusting for gender, age, ethnicity, and area-level deprivation compared experiences of adults reporting learning disability with those who did not., Results: Survey participants comprised 623 157 people aged ≥16 years, including 6711 reporting learning disability. Adults reporting learning disability were more likely to be male, younger, of mixed or multiple ethnicities, and live in more deprived areas. All chronic conditions included in the survey were more common in adults reporting learning disability, especially reported sensory, neurodevelopmental, neurological, and mental health conditions. Adults reporting learning disability were twice as likely to have a preferred GP, and less likely to find their practice's website easy to navigate. They were also less likely to have confidence and trust in their healthcare professional, or feel their needs were met., Conclusion: Adults reporting a learning disability had a higher likelihood of chronic health conditions. Their reported experiences of primary care indicate that, despite recent initiatives to improve services offered, further adaptations to the consistency and ease of access to primary care is needed., (© The Authors.)

Objectives: Little is known about adults who self-report as autistic. This study aimed to profile the demographic characteristics, long-term health conditions and primary care experiences of adults who self-report as autistic (including those with and without a formal diagnosis)., Design/setting: A nationally representative cross-sectional survey of adults registered with National Health Service (NHS) General Practitioner (GP) surgeries in England., Participants: 623 157 survey respondents aged 16 and over, including 4481 who self-report as autistic., Outcomes: Weighted descriptive statistics, with 95% CIs. Logistic regression modelling adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity and area-level deprivation compared those who self-report as autistic with the rest of the population., Results: A total of 4481 of the 623 157 survey participants included in the analysis self-reported autism, yielding a weighted proportion estimate of 1.41% (95% CI 1.35% to 1.46%). Adults self-reporting as autistic were more likely to be younger, male or non-binary, to identify as a gender different from their sex at birth, have a non-heterosexual sexual identity, be of white or mixed or multiple ethnic groups, non-religious, without caring responsibilities, unemployed, live in more deprived areas and not smoke. All chronic conditions covered were more prevalent among adults self-reporting as autistic, including learning disability, mental health conditions, neurological conditions, dementia, blindness or partial sight and deafness or hearing loss. Adults self-reporting as autistic were also less likely to report a positive experience of making an appointment (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.98) and navigating GP practice websites (aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87) and more likely to report seeking advice from a friend or family member prior to making an appointment (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.38) and having a preferred GP (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 2.06 to 2.46). They were less likely to report that their needs were met (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.83)., Conclusions: Adults self-reporting as autistic have a distinctive sociodemographic profile and heightened rates of long-term conditions. They report challenges in both accessing primary care and having their needs met when they do. These findings should inform future care initiatives designed to meet the needs of this group., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SJT has previously received funding from The Wellcome Trust, and the National Health Service Small Business Research Initiative, as well as research support from the National Institute for Health and Care Research for autism-related research studies. SM receives salary support from UKPRP/MRC (Grant MR/V049879/1)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Autism is difficult to identify in adults due to lack of validated self-report questionnaires. We compared the effectiveness of the autism-spectrum quotient (AQ) and the Ritvo autism-Asperger's diagnostic scale-revised (RAADS-R) questionnaires in adult mental health services in two English counties., Methods: A subsample of adults who completed the AQ and RAADS-R were invited to take part in an autism diagnostic observation schedule (ADOS Module 4) assessment with probability of selection weighted by scores on the questionnaires., Results: There were 364 men and 374 women who consented to take part. Recorded diagnoses were most commonly mood disorders (44%) and mental and behavioural disorders due to alcohol/substance misuse (19%), and 4.8% (95% CI [2.9, 7.5]) were identified with autism (ADOS Module 4 10+). One had a pre-existing diagnosis of autism; five (26%) had borderline personality disorders (all female) and three (17%) had mood disorders. The AQ and RAADS-R had fair test accuracy (area under receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve 0.77 and 0.79, respectively). AQ sensitivity was 0.79 (95% CI [0.54, 0.94]) and specificity was 0.77 (95% CI [0.65, 0.86]); RAADS-R sensitivity was 0.75 (95% CI [0.48, 0.93]) and specificity was 0.71 (95% CI [0.60, 0.81])., Conclusions: The AQ and RAADS-R can guide decisions to refer adults in mental health services to autism diagnostic services., (© 2020 The Authors. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)