Adults with intellectual disability experience increased rates of mental health disorders and adverse mental health outcomes.

Explore childhood risk factors associated with adverse mental health outcomes during adulthood as defined by high cost of care, use of psychotropic medication without a severe mental illness and psychiatric hospital admissions.

Data on 137 adults with intellectual disability were collected through an intellectual disability community service in an inner London borough. Childhood modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors were extracted from records to map onto variables identified as potential risk factors. Logistic and linear regression models were employed to analyse their associations with adverse outcomes.

We showed that the co-occurrence of intellectual disability with autism spectrum disorder and/or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were associated with psychotropic medication use and high-cost care packages. However, when challenging behaviour during childhood was added, ADHD and autism spectrum disorder were no longer significant and challenging behaviour better explained medication prescribing and higher cost care. In addition, the severity of intellectual disability was associated with higher cost care packages. Ethnicity (Black and mixed) also predicted higher cost of care.

Challenging behaviour during childhood emerged as a critical variable affecting outcomes in young adulthood and mediated the association between adult adverse mental health outcomes and co-occurring neurodevelopmental conditions, that is, ADHD and autism. These findings emphasise the need for effective early intervention strategies to address challenging behaviour during childhood. Such interventions for challenging behaviour will need to take into consideration autism and ADHD.

NHS England recommends the commissioning of intensive support teams (ISTs) to provide effective support to people with intellectual disability (ID) when in crisis. However, there is a paucity of evidence regarding how these services should be organised. This exploratory secondary analysis of data from the IST-ID study aimed to investigate IST characteristics that relate to clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was mean change in the total score on the Aberrant Behavior Checklist and its subscales.

A measure of mental illness severity was the only variable associated with our primary outcome of reduction in challenging behaviour. Accommodation type, affective status and gender were associated with the subdomains of irritability, hyperactivity and lethargy in unadjusted and adjusted analyses.

Our findings indicate that variation in clinical outcomes is influenced by individual rather than organisational factors. Further research on the theoretical fidelity of the IST-ID model is needed.

1. (1) To gain a basic understanding of low-intensity psychological intervention in children and young people with genetic conditions.

2. (2) To enhance understanding of the practicalities and acceptability of delivering low-intensity psychological intervention to children and young people with genetic conditions and co-morbid emotional and behavioural difficulties.

3. (3) To learn about the potential clinical benefits of delivering low-intensity psychological intervention to children and young people with genetic conditions in the context of stepped care.

Mental disorders and ADHD in people with ID are higher than in the general population.Clinicians may be reluctant to diagnose ADHD in people with ID. They could be denied effective treatment.

The purpose of the study was to ascertain antipsychotic use in people with ID before and after the a diagnosis of ADHD.

A casenote review in an ID service for aduls with ADHD. Data collected on psychotropic use before and after the diagnosis.

Forty-eight aduls with ADHD-ID were identified. 38(79%) were male and 10(21%) were female. 19 to 58 years of age. Four (8%) had mild ID; 44 (92%) had moderate to severe ID. 27(56%) had anxiety, mood disorders or psychosis. 21(44%) had ADHD only. Challenging behaviour was reported in 24 (50%) of cases. Thirty-three (68%) used psychotropic medication prior to the diagnosis of ADHD and after the diagnosis. Post-diagnosis, 20(60%) continued to use antipsychotic medication indicating the elimiation of antipsychotic use in 13(40%) of people. The level of medication use remained the same in spite of the reduction of antipsychotic medication. The diagnoses of challenging behaviour was not affected by the reduction in antipsychotic medication and the increase in ADHD medication use.

The use of antipsychotic medication in people with intellectual disaibilities and ADHD is high. ADHD should be considered when people present wtih challenging behaviour. ADHD medication can be effective in treating ADHD-ID and can lead to a significant reduction in the use of antipsychotic medication.

No significant relationships.

Restrictive interventions (seclusion, restraint and special observations) are used on psychiatric wards when there are no other means available to keep a patient or others safe. These measures can be traumatic, and the Mental Health Commission and the Health Service Executive are focused on minimising their use. We set out to determine whether, following a COVID related reduction in bed numbers on a high dependency psychiatric ward in St John of God Hospital in Dublin, there was a change in their incidence.

Data on restrictive interventions and challenging behaviours were gathered for 9-month periods before and after March 2020 when COVID related ward changes took place. Figures were also collected on seclusion and restraint for the previous 18 months for a longer-term view. Ward and hospital occupancy levels were also recorded.

Between the two time periods, episodes of seclusion fell by 53% and episodes of restraint by 56%. The hours devoted to special observation declined by 30% and incidents of challenging behaviours fell by 26%. Ward occupancy levels fell by only 5%. The longer-term comparison of figures for seclusion and restraint point towards a downward trend from mid-2019 that was accentuated in the post-COVID period.

The changes found may relate to reduced crowding on the ward or other COVID related factors such as the emphasis on social distancing and a shared sense of purpose on the ward. The longer-term trend points towards an emerging cultural shift. The challenge now is to sustain and build upon these changes.

Previous systematic reviews showed no significant association between epilepsy and challenging behaviours in adults with intellectual disabilities.

To identify whether there is an association between epilepsy and challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities by carrying out a systematic review of published data. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020178092.

We searched five databases and hand-searched six journals. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full articles using a standardised eligibility checklist. Several meta-analyses were carried out.

The narrative analysis of data from 34 included articles (14 168 adults with intellectual disabilities, 4781 of whom also had epilepsy) showed no significant association between epilepsy and challenging behaviour. Meta-analysis was possible on data from 16 controlled studies. This showed no significant intergroup difference but after sensitivity analysis meta-analysis of 10 studies showed a significantly higher rate of overall challenging behaviour in the epilepsy group (effect size: 0.16) compared with the non-epilepsy group. Aggression and self-injurious behaviour both showed a statistically significant higher rate in the epilepsy group, with very small effect sizes (0.16 and 0.28 respectively). No significant intergroup difference was observed in the rate of stereotypy.

The findings are contradictory and must be interpreted with caution because of the difficulty in pooling data from varied studies, which is likely to introduce confounding. Where significant differences were found, effect sizes are small and may not be clinically significant, and there are major methodological flaws in the included studies, which should be addressed in future large-scale properly controlled studies.