Search

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.

People with intellectual disabilities die at much younger ages than the general population, with this gap in life expectancy greater for females than males. This study aimed to seek the views of international experts concerning evidence relating to gender and the premature deaths of people with intellectual disabilities, their views on priorities for future research, and recommendations for future research and policy. Twenty international experts on the health and/or mortality of people with intellectual disabilities were invited to complete an online questionnaire. The questionnaire was based on summary statements from a literature review on gender and premature death among people with intellectual disabilities compared to the general population. Summary statements included general topics such as mortality and specific major causes of death (e.g., cancer). For each summary statement, respondents rated on 5-point scales: their agreement with the statement; the importance of the topic; and the adequacy of the evidence. Participants then indicated their top three priorities for future research, and gave recommendations for future research and policy. Eighteen (90% response rate) respondents from nine countries participated. There was consensus among respondents regarding the greater inequality in intellectual disability vs. general population mortality rates for women compared to men. Evidence was considered inadequate for most topics. Evidence on cause-specific death rates was the most frequently mentioned main research priority, followed by age trends in mortality compared to the general population. Recommendations ranged from the need to use consistent methodology and case definition in future research, to the need for governments to be called to account on the issue. Further evidence on gender and mortality is urgently needed; an international consensus on recommendations for future research pertaining to gender and the premature deaths of people with intellectual

People with intellectual disabilities die at much younger ages than the general population, with this gap in life expectancy greater for females than males. This study aimed to seek the views of international experts concerning evidence relating to gender and the premature deaths of people with intellectual disabilities, their views on priorities for future research, and recommendations for future research and policy. Twenty international experts on the health and/or mortality of people with intellectual disabilities were invited to complete an online questionnaire. The questionnaire was based on summary statements from a literature review on gender and premature death among people with intellectual disabilities compared to the general population. Summary statements included general topics such as mortality and specific major causes of death (e.g., cancer). For each summary statement, respondents rated on 5-point scales: their agreement with the statement; the importance of the topic; and the adequacy of the evidence. Participants then indicated their top three priorities for future research, and gave recommendations for future research and policy. Eighteen (90% response rate) respondents from nine countries participated. There was consensus among respondents regarding the greater inequality in intellectual disability vs. general population mortality rates for women compared to men. Evidence was considered inadequate for most topics. Evidence on cause-specific death rates was the most frequently mentioned main research priority, followed by age trends in mortality compared to the general population. Recommendations ranged from the need to use consistent methodology and case definition in future research, to the need for governments to be called to account on the issue. Further evidence on gender and mortality is urgently needed; an international consensus on recommendations for future research pertaining to gender and the premature deaths of people with intellectual

Background: Given the much greater COVID-19 mortality risk experienced by people with intellectual disabilities (ID), understanding the willingness of people with ID to take a COVID-19 vaccine is a major public health issue. Method: In December 2020 to February 2021, across the United Kingdom, 621 adults with ID were interviewed remotely and 348 family carers or support workers of adults with ID with greater needs completed an online survey, including a question on willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine if offered. Results: Eighty-seven per cent of interviewees with ID were willing to take a COVID-19 vaccine, with willingness associated with white ethnicity, having already had a flu vaccine, gaining information about COVID-19 from television but not from social media, and knowing COVID-19 social restrictions rules. A percentage of 81.7% of surveyed carers of adults with ID with greater needs reported that the person would be willing to take a COVID-19 vaccine, with willingness associated with white ethnicity, having a health condition of concern in the context of COVID-19, having had a flu vaccine, being close to someone who had died due to COVID-19, and having shielded at some point during the pandemic. Conclusions: Reported willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine is high among adults with ID in the United Kingdom, with factors associated with willingness having clear implications for public health policy and practice.

Introduction: Obesity is a global pandemic associated with comorbidities, premature death and significant healthcare costs. Increases in obesity are being recorded for people with intellectual disabilities, but at a higher rate compared to the general population. Obesity and weight management guidance recommends evidence-based obesity interventions - comprising energy-deficit-diets, physical activity, and behaviour change techniques - which are tailored to meet the needs of specific populations. Methods: The effectiveness of tailored obesity interventions for people with intellectual disabilities and their theoretical underpinnings are explored in this study together with the wider influences of the obesogenic environment. Results: Implementing obesity interventions without recognising the wider influences of the obesogenic environment is insufficient. A logic model is developed that presents the wider context, systems, inputs, activities, mechanisms of change, outputs, outcomes and impact that may help successfully implement and sustain obesity interventions for people with intellectual disabilities. Implications: People with intellectual disabilities are at risk to the wider obesogenic influences and face a greater burden of related diseases and complications. The proposed logic model may help successfully implement and sustain obesity interventions for this population within local communities.

Background: Whilst people with intellectual disability grow older, evidence has emerged internationally about the largely unmet health needs of this specific ageing population. Health checks have been implemented in some countries to address those health inequalities. Evaluations have focused on measuring process outcomes due to challenges measuring quality of life outcomes. In addition, the cost-effectiveness is currently unknown. As part of a national guideline for this population we sought to explore the likely cost-effectiveness of annual health checks in England. Methods: Decision-analytical Markov modelling was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a strategy, in which health checks were provided for older people with intellectual disability, when compared with standard care. The approach we took was explorative. Individual models were developed for a selected range of health conditions, which had an expected high economic impact and for which sufficient evidence was available for the modelling. In each of the models, hypothetical cohorts were followed from 40 yrs. of age until death. The outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. Costs were assessed from a health provider perspective and expressed in 2016 GBP. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3.5%. We carried out probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Data from published studies as well as expert opinion informed parameters. Results: Health checks led to a mean QALY gain of 0.074 (95% CI 0.072 to 0.119); and mean incremental costs of £4787 (CI 95% 4773 to 5017). For a threshold of £30,000 per QALY, health checks were not cost-effective (mean ICER £85,632; 95% CI 82,762 to 131,944). Costs of intervention needed to reduce from £258 to under £100 per year in order for health checks to be cost-effective. Conclusion: Whilst findings need to be considered with caution as the model was exploratory in that it was based on as