A scoping review of clusters of multiple long-term conditions in people with intellectual disabilities and factors impacting on outcomes for this patient group.

People with intellectual disabilities (ID) are vulnerable to multiple long-term conditions (MLTC). However, in the UK, there are no individual strategies tailored for them. This study synthesised evidence on prevalence of MLTC in people with ID alongside risk factors, outcomes and preventative strategies. The scoping review used the tool Abstrackr to search retrieved articles from three bibliographic databases. Of 933 articles initially screened and further identified, 20 papers met our inclusion criteria. Our findings revealed significant data on prevalence of MLTC in people with ID across the studies, but very limited data on clusters or patterns of co-occurrence in this population. The majority of papers explored risk factors and strategies for prevention of MLTC, but far fewer compared outcomes by MLTC. The identified gaps in the literature indicate the need for further research to identify clusters of MLTC and tailored prevention strategies to reduce poor outcomes in this population.

Comparing the number and length of primary care consultations in people with and without intellectual disabilities and health needs: observational cohort study using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, 15-min appointments with the general practitioner (GP) are recommended for people with complex health conditions, including intellectual disabilities and health needs, but we do not know whether this happens. AIMS: We compared number and length of primary care consultations (GP, nurse, other allied health, other) for people with and without intellectual disabilities and health needs. METHODS: Linked primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) in England were used to investigate face-to-face and telephone primary care consultations in 2017-2019. Health needs investigated were: epilepsy; incontinence; severe visual/hearing impairments; severe mobility difficulties; cerebral palsy; and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding. Age and gender-standardized consultation rates per year (Poisson), duration of consultations, and the proportion of "long consultations" (≥15 min) were reported. RESULTS: People with intellectual disabilities (n = 7,794) had 1.9 times as many GP consultations per year as those without (n = 176,807; consultation rate ratio = 1.87 [95% confidence interval 1.86-1.89]). Consultation rates with nurses and allied healthcare professionals were also twice as high. Mean GP consultation time was 9-10 min regardless of intellectual disability/health need status. Long GP consultations were less common in people with intellectual disabilities (18.2% [17.8-18.7] vs. 20.9% [20.8-21.0]). Long consultations with practice nurses were more common in people with health needs, particularly severe visual loss. CONCLUSIONS: People with intellectual disabilities and/or health needs tend to have more, rather than longer, GP consultations compared with the rest of the population. We recommend further investigation into the role of practice nurses to support people with intellectual disabilities and health needs.

Health Needs and Their Relationship with Life Expectancy in People with and without Intellectual Disabilities in England.

Health needs are common in people living with intellectual disabilities, but we do not know how they contribute to life expectancy. We used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) linked with hospital/mortality data in England (2017-2019) to explore life expectancy among people with or without intellectual disabilities, indicated by the presence or absence, respectively, of: epilepsy; incontinence; severe visual loss; severe visual impairment; severe mobility difficulties; cerebral palsy and PEG feeding. Life expectancy and 95% confidence intervals were compared using flexible parametric methods. At baseline, 46.4% (total n = 7794) of individuals with intellectual disabilities compared with 9.7% (total n = 176,807) in the comparison group had ≥1 health need. Epilepsy was the most common health need (18.7% vs. 1.1%). All health needs except hearing impairment were associated with shorter life expectancy: PEG feeding and mobility difficulties were associated with the greatest loss in life years (65-68% and 41-44%, respectively). Differential life expectancy attenuated but remained (≈12% life years lost) even after restricting the population to those without health needs (additional years expected to live at 10 years: 65.5 [60.3, 71.1] vs. 74.3 [73.8, 74.7]). We conclude that health needs play a significant role but do not explain all of the differential life expectancy experienced by people with intellectual disabilities.

Mortality disparities and deprivation among people with intellectual disabilities in England: 2000-2019.

BACKGROUND: The effect of policy initiatives and deprivation on mortality disparities in people with intellectual disabilities is not clear. METHODS: An electronic health record observational study of linked primary care data in England from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and the Office for National Statistics deaths data from 2000 to 2019 was undertaken. All-cause and cause-specific mortality for people with intellectual disabilities were calculated by gender and deprivation status (index of multiple deprivation quintile) using direct age-standardised mortality rates (all years) and ratios (SMR; 2000-2009 vs 2010-2019). RESULTS: Among 1.0 million patients (n=33 844 with intellectual disability; n=980 586 general population without intellectual disability), differential mortality was consistently higher in people with intellectual disabilities and there was no evidence of attenuation over time. There was a dose-response relationship between all-cause mortality and lower deprivation quintile in the general population which was not observed in people with intellectual disabilities. Cause-specific SMR were consistent in both the 2000-2009 and 2010-2019 calendar periods, with a threefold increased risk of death in both males and females with intellectual disabilities (SMR ranges: 2.91-3.51). Mortality was highest from epilepsy (SMR ranges: 22.90-52.74) and aspiration pneumonia (SMR ranges: 19.31-35.44). SMRs were disproportionately high for people with intellectual disabilities living in the least deprived areas. CONCLUSIONS: People with intellectual disabilities in England continue to experience significant mortality disparities and there is no evidence that the situation is improving. Deprivation indicators may not be effective for targeting vulnerable individuals.