Developing an understanding of the risk factors for falls among adults with intellectual disabilities: a commentary.

Commentary on: Pope J, Truesdale M, Brown M. Risk factors for falls among adults with intellectual disabilities: A narrative review. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2021; 34: 274-285. 10.1111/jar.12805 Falls are a serious and common problem for people with intellectual disabilities (ID). Whilst there is available evidence on falls risk factors for the general population, there is a lack of awareness and understanding of the contributing risk factors for this population. This commentary critically appraises a recent narrative review which sought to identify the risk factors for falls among people with ID. Clinical practice implications: Community nurses may identify people with ID at risk of falls, and work alongside other healthcare professionals and carers to provide tailored multidisciplinary falls-prevention interventions for individuals with ID living in the community.

Preventing falls at home among people with intellectual disabilities: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Falls are common among people with intellectual disabilities. Many falls happen within the home. Our scoping review aimed to identify evidence for falls-risk factors and falls-prevention interventions for this population. METHOD: We conducted a multi-database search to identify any type of published study that explored falls-risk factors or falls-prevention interventions for people with intellectual disabilities. Following a process of (i) title & abstract and (ii) full-text screening, data was extracted from the included studies and described narratively. RESULTS: Forty-one studies were included. Risks are multifactorial. There was limited evidence of medical, behavioural/psychological, or environmental interventions to address modifiable risk factors, and no evidence of the interventions' cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically and cost effective, acceptable and accessible falls-prevention pathways should be available for people with intellectual disabilities who are at risk of falls from an earlier age than the general population.

The prevalence of mental health conditions in healthcare workers during and after a pandemic: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: This review aims to explore the prevalence and incidence rates of mental health conditions in healthcare workers during and after a pandemic outbreak and which factors influence rates. BACKGROUND: Pandemics place considerable burden on care services, impacting on workers' health and their ability to deliver services. We systematically reviewed the prevalence and incidence of mental health conditions in care workers during pandemics. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO for cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies were undertaken on the 31 March 2020 (from inception to 31 March 2020). REVIEW METHODS: Only prevalence or incidence rates for mental health conditions from validated tools were included. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out by two reviewers. Meta-analyses and subgroup analyses were produced for pandemic period (pre- and post), age, country income, country, clinical setting for major depression disorder (MDD), anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). RESULTS: No studies of incidence were found. Prevalence estimates showed that the most common mental health condition was PTSD (21.7%) followed by anxiety disorder (16.1%), MDD (13.4%) and acute stress disorder (7.4%) (low risk of bias). For symptoms of these conditions there was substantial variation in the prevalence estimates for depression (95% confidence interval [CI]:31.8%; 60.5%), anxiety (95% CI:34.2%; 57.7%) and PTSD symptoms (95% CI,21.4%; 65.4%) (moderate risk of bias). Age, level of exposure and type of care professional were identified as important moderating factors. CONCLUSION: Mental disorders affect healthcare workers during and after infectious disease pandemics, with higher proportions experiencing symptoms. IMPACT: This review provides prevalence estimates of mental health conditions during and after a pandemic which could be used to inform service staffing impact and formulation of preventative strategies, by identifying clinical populations who may be at high risk of developing mental health symptoms and conditions.

Healthcare practitioners' views and experiences of barriers and facilitators to weight management interventions for adults with intellectual disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is common in adults with intellectual disabilities, yet little is known about how weight management interventions are provided for this population. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were held with 14 healthcare practitioners involved in weight management interventions in an English county. A study topic guide was developed to elicit practitioners' views and experiences of barriers and facilitators to weight management for adults with intellectual disabilities. Responses were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Several barriers are involved in weight management for people with intellectual disabilities including communication challenges, general practitioners' lack of knowledge and awareness of weight management services, inconsistencies in caring support, resource constraints, wider external circumstances surrounding the individuals and motivational issues. Facilitators include reasonable adjustments to existing weight management services. However, there is a need for specialist weight management provision for people with intellectual disabilities. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides suggestions for future research, policy and practice consideration.

An integrative review of multicomponent weight management interventions for adults with intellectual disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is more prevalent in people with intellectual disabilities and increases the risk of developing serious medical conditions. UK guidance recommends multicomponent weight management interventions (MCIs), tailored for different population groups. METHODS: An integrative review utilizing systematic review methodology was conducted to identify the types of MCIs delivered to adults with intellectual disabilities. FINDINGS: Five studies were identified. All of the studies' MCIs were tailored for adults with intellectual disabilities. Tailoring included measures such as simplified communication tools, individualized sessions, and the presence of carers where appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Emerging evidence suggests ways in which MCIs can be tailored for adults with intellectual disabilities but, given the few studies identified, it is not possible to recommend how they can be routinely tailored. Further studies are justified for adults with intellectual disabilities at risk of obesity-related conditions.