Search

Autistic people experience more health conditions and earlier mortality. This study investigated views about a primary care health check for autistic adults to inform its design. Fifty-one people participated in consultation groups and interviews, comprising autistic adults (some with co-occurring intellectual disabilities), adults with intellectual disabilities, supporters and health professionals. Participants wanted the health check to cover physical and mental health and social functioning. They emphasised the importance of sharing information about individual needs and associated adjustments before the health check. They highlighted the need to change the way healthcare services communicate with autistic people, such as reducing phone contact and booking appointments online. They wanted individual choice in how the health check was completed, with video call or email offered alongside face-to-face. Participants raised the need for further training of primary care staff on autism, to highlight the diversity of experiences of autistic people and ways in which difficulties, such as pain, may present differently. Clinicians raised questions about the capacity of mental health and social care services to meet the additional needs potentially identified through the health check. This study represents a key step in the development and co-design of a UK primary care health check for autistic people.

Autistic people experience disparities in employment which may be exacerbated for individuals in skilled employment. Little is known about the experiences of autistic people in skilled employment or how they define success. We used a community-based participatory research approach to conduct a thematic analysis with an inductive approach at a semantic level through a critical realist paradigm. We interviewed 45 autistic people with skilled training, 11 supervisors, and 8 key informants. We purposively sampled to maximize variation. We addressed trustworthiness through multiple coders and peer debriefing. Common themes included high stakes of disclosure, unconventional pathways to careers, disconnects with service and support systems, mental health challenges from trauma/burnout, autistic advantages in the workplace, and complex dimensions of discrimination. Participants defined success as opportunities for growth, work/life balance, financial independence, sense of community, and feeling valued, accepted, and like their work had meaning. Strategies to facilitate success suggested a multi-faceted and wholistic approach including attention to the role of supervisors. Our findings suggest a highly customizable, systems-focused, multifaceted approach to autism employment intervention could be useful in improving skilled employment outcomes. We recommend further work particularly in the areas of disclosure and destigmatizing disability in the workplace.

Our objective was to develop a measure of healthcare providers' self-efficacy in providing healthcare to autistic adults and to better understand their training needs. We used a community-based participatory research approach with academic researchers, autistic adults, supporters, and healthcare providers. We developed a one-page questionnaire which included the new 6-item self-efficacy scale, two items on how challenging and rewarding it is to provide care to autistic adults, and seven items on provider characteristics. We surveyed 143 healthcare providers from eight primary care clinics in Oregon and California, United States. Preliminary psychometric testing found the Academic Autism Spectrum Partnership in Research and Education (AASPIRE) Adult Autism Healthcare Provider Self-Efficacy Scale to have good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.87) and consist of a single factor. A priori hypothesis testing found correlations in the expected directions. Only a minority of providers reported high confidence in communicating with patients (25%); performing physical exams or procedures (43%); accurately diagnosing and treating other medical issues (40%); helping patients stay calm and comfortable during visits (38%); identifying accommodation needs (14%); and making necessary accommodations (16%). While providers need training across all aspects of care related to autism in adulthood, interventions should pay particular attention to helping providers communicate with patients and identify and make accommodations.

There is a growing recognition of the need for interventions to improve the healthcare of autistic adults. However, there is a dearth of validated measures to evaluate such interventions. Our objectives were to use a community-based participatory research approach to create an accessible set of patient- and proxy-reported instruments to measure healthcare outcomes and potential intervention targets in autistic adults and to assess the instruments' psychometric characteristics, including content validity, construct validity, and internal consistency reliability. We administered a survey to 244 autistic adults recruited from 12 primary care clinics in Oregon and California, USA (194 participating directly and 50 participating via a proxy reporter). Community partners ensured items were easy to understand and captured the intended construct. The Academic Autism Spectrum Partnership in Research and Education (AASPIRE) Visit Preparedness Scale, Healthcare Accommodations Scale, and Patient--Provider Communication Scale were each found to have a single factor. The AASPIRE Health and Healthcare Self-Efficacy Scale had two factors: Individual Healthcare Self-Efficacy and Relationship-Dependent Healthcare Self-Efficacy. Both patient- and proxy-reported versions of all scales had good to excellent internal consistency reliability, with alphas ranging from 0.81 to 0.96. The scales were associated with the Barriers to Healthcare Checklist and the Unmet Healthcare Needs Checklist in the hypothesized directions.

As interest in autism in adulthood grows, so does the need for methods to promote the inclusion of autistic adults in research. Our objective was to create practice-based guidelines for the inclusion of autistic adults, both as research team members and as study participants. We conducted an institutional ethnography of three closely related research partnerships that used participatory methods with autistic adults over the years 2006-2018. We used an iterative approach which combined discussions with community and academic partners and artifact review. Guidelines to promote the inclusion of autistic adults as co-researchers focus on being transparent about partnership goals, clearly defining roles and choosing partners, creating processes for effective communication and power-sharing, building and maintaining trust, disseminating findings, encouraging community capacitation, and fairly compensating partners. Guidelines to promote the inclusion of autistic adults as study participants focus on maximizing autonomy and inclusion, creating an accessible consent process, offering multiple modes of participation, adapting survey instruments for use with autistic adults, creating accessible qualitative interview guides, and handling data from proxy reporters. Although these practice-based guidelines may not apply to all research teams, we hope that other researchers can capitalize on these practical lessons when including autistic adults in research.

Our objective was to use a community-based participatory research approach to identify and compare barriers to healthcare experienced by autistic adults and adults with and without other disabilities. To do so, we developed a Long- and Short-Form instrument to assess barriers in clinical and research settings. Using the Barriers to Healthcare Checklist--Long Form, we surveyed 437 participants (209 autistic, 55 non-autistic with disabilities, and 173 non-autistic without disabilities). Autistic participants selected different and greater barriers to healthcare, particularly in areas related to emotional regulation, patient-provider communication, sensory sensitivity, and healthcare navigation. Top barriers were fear or anxiety (35% (n = 74)), not being able to process information fast enough to participate in real-time discussions about healthcare (32% (n = 67)), concern about cost (30% (n = 62)), facilities causing sensory issues (30% (n = 62)), and difficulty communicating with providers (29% (n = 61)). The Long Form instrument exhibited good content and construct validity. The items combined to create the Short Form had predominantly high levels of correlation (range 0.2-0.8, p < 0.001) and showed responsiveness to change. We recommend healthcare providers, clinics, and others working in healthcare settings to be aware of these barriers, and urge more intervention research to explore means for removing them.

Our objective was to obtain an in-depth understanding of autistic adults' experiences with healthcare and their recommendations for improving care. Our academic-community partnership used a community-based participatory research approach to conduct semi-structured, open-ended interviews with 39 autistic adults and 16 people who had experience supporting autistic adults in healthcare settings. Participants identified patient-level, autism-related factors that impact healthcare interactions, including verbal communication skills, sensory sensitivities, challenges with body awareness, slow processing speed, atypical non-verbal communication, and challenges with organization. However, the success of healthcare interactions largely depended on the interplay between patient- and provider-level factors, as well as the larger context in which patients were receiving care. Provider-level factors included providers' knowledge about autism in adults, incorrect assumptions about individual patients, willingness to allow written communication, use of accessible language, openness to providing other accommodations, and skill in appropriately incorporating supporters. System-level factors included the availability of supporters, complexity of the healthcare system, accessibility of healthcare facilities, and stigma about autism. Further efforts are needed to empower patients, adequately train providers, increase the accessibility of the healthcare system, and decrease discrimination.