Carer-led health interventions to monitor, promote and improve the health of adults with intellectual disabilities in the community: a systematic review.

Using carers to help assess, monitor, or promote health in people with intellectual disabilities (ID) may be one way of improving health outcomes in a population that experiences significant health inequalities. This paper provides a review of carer-led health interventions in various populations and healthcare settings, in order to investigate potential roles for carers in ID health care. We used rapid review methodology, using the Scopus database, citation tracking and input from ID healthcare professionals to identify relevant research. 24 studies were included in the final review. For people with ID, the only existing interventions found were carer-completed health diaries which, while being well received, failed to improve health outcomes. Studies in non-ID populations show that carers can successfully deliver screening procedures, health promotion interventions and interventions to improve coping skills, pain management and cognitive functioning. While such examples provide a useful starting point for the development of future carer-led health interventions for people with ID, the paucity of research in this area means that the most appropriate means of engaging carers in a way that will reliably impact on health outcomes in this population remains, as yet, unknown.

Assessment of an incentivised scheme to provide annual health checks in primary care for adults with intellectual disability: a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disabilities (ID) have many comorbidities but experience inequities in access to health care. National Health Service England uses an opt-in incentive scheme to encourage annual health checks of patients with ID in primary care. We investigated whether the first 3 years of the programme had improved health care of people with ID. METHODS: We did a longitudinal cohort study that used data from The Health Improvement Network primary care database. We did multivariate logistic regression to assess associations between various characteristics and whether or not practices had opted in to the incentivised scheme. FINDINGS: We assessed data for 8692 patients from 222 incentivised practices and those for 918 patients in 48 non-incentivised practices. More blood tests (eg, total cholesterol, odds ratio [OR] 1·88, 95% CI 1·47-2·41, p<0·0001) general health measurements (eg, smoking status, 6·0, 4·10-8·79, p<0·0001), specific health assessments (eg, hearing, 24·0, 11·5-49·9, p<0·0001), and medication reviews (2·23, 1·68-2·97, p<0·0001) were done in incentivised than in non-incentivised practices, and more health action plans (6·15, 1·41-26·9, p=0·0156) and secondary care referrals (1·47, 1·05-2·05, p=0·0256) were made. Identification rates were higher in incentivised practices for thyroid disorder (OR 2·72, 95% CI 1·09-6·81, p=0·0323), gastrointestinal disorders (1·94, 1·03-3·65, p=0·0390), and obesity (2·49, 1·76-3·53, p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Targeted annual health checks for people with ID in primary care could reduce health inequities. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.