Search

Health represents the dynamic balance of physical, mental, social, and existential well‐being in adapting to conditions of life and the environment. Health is essential for the quality of life (QoL) of all individuals, including those with intellectual disability (ID). People with ID experience health inequities and barriers to quality health care that must be addressed to foster the QoL of this population. This paper illustrates how poor health negatively impacts each of the eight domains of the QoL model proposed by Shalock and Verdugo (2002) (e.g., health conditions limit work performance, decreasing opportunities for personal development and self‐determination). Suggestions for healthcare practices and behaviors that would improve the quality of healthcare provided to people with ID, and thus their health and QoL, are offered (e.g., engaging people with ID in the medical conversation, talking to them in plain language and without jargon enhances the personal development, self‐determination, interpersonal relationships, and social inclusion domains of QoL). Finally, we suggest actions that people with ID and their families might implement to maximize their health and wellness (e.g., maintaining a healthy lifestyle, and using the health promotion resources provided by disability organizations). [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]

Background: Collecting self‐reported health and quality of life (QoL) outcomes is increasingly considered best practice, but people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) are often excluded from patient‐reported outcome measures. Objective: This article provides a literature‐informed overview of the state of the field of self‐reporting of physical health and QoL in research with adults with IDD. Approach: We first identified and synthesized definitions of key constructs related to the self‐reporting of health. Next, we summarize literature on existing and emerging practices focused on health and QoL assessment, discussing the frequent and sometimes overly broad use of proxy‐respondents in the IDD field. We then highlight emerging directions focused on cognitive accessibility and universal design. Finally, we provide conclusions and recommendations for the field. Conclusions: Informed by the literature, we provide action steps to guide the field in considering how to incorporate self‐reporting of health outcomes by people with IDD in research, policy, and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors assessed available prevalence information regarding neuropsychiatric conditions among adults with Down syndrome (DS) and compared these findings among adults with other intellectual disability (non-DS). The study entailed a survey of 291 adults with DS living in Ohio (USA). Twenty-three percent of adults with DS reported having a co-occurring psychiatric disorder, a smaller than the reported occurrence of such conditions in the general adult intellectual disability population. Depression, anxiety disorders, and dementia or Alzheimer's disease were the most frequently reported neuropsychiatric disorders by adults with DS. The likelihood of experiencing a psychiatric disorder increased with age but did not vary by sex among adults with DS. Lower rates of problem behavior were reported in adults with DS compared to adults with intellectual disability (non-DS). The authors' findings indicate that adults with DS may present different rates and types of co-occurring psychiatric disorders than the larger population of adults with other intellectual disability. These findings warrant additional research and could provide critical information for planning and intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]