Do-Not-Attempt-Resuscitation orders for people with intellectual disabilities : dilemmas and uncertainties for ID physicians and trainees. The importance of the deliberation process

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Not much is known about Do-Not-Attempt-Resuscitation (DNAR) decision-making for people with intellectual disabilities (IDs). The aim of this study was to clarify the problems and pitfalls of non-emergency DNAR decision-making for people with IDs, from the perspective of ID physicians. METHODS: This qualitative study was based on semi-structured individual interviews, focus group interviews and an expert meeting, all recorded digitally and transcribed verbatim. Forty ID physicians and trainees were interviewed about problems, pitfalls and dilemmas of DNAR decision-making for people with IDs in the Netherlands. Data were analysed using Grounded Theory procedures. RESULTS: The core category identified was 'Patient-related considerations when issuing DNAR orders'. Within this category, medical considerations were the main contributory factor for the ID physicians. Evaluation of quality of life was left to the relatives and was sometimes a cause of conflicts between physicians and relatives. The category of 'The decision-maker role' was as important as that of 'The decision procedure in an organisational context'. The procedure of issuing a non-emergency DNAR order and the embedding of this procedure in the health care organisation were important for the ID physicians. CONCLUSION: The theory we developed clarifies that DNAR decision-making for people with IDs is complex and causes uncertainties. This theory offers a sound basis for training courses for physicians to deal with uncertainties regarding DNAR decision-making, as well as a method for advance care planning. Health care organisations are strongly advised to implement a procedure regarding DNAR decision-making

Photomyogenic response in Niemann–Pick type C: a case report

Contains fulltext : 98214.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)1 maart 201

The prevalence and incidence of mental ill-health in adults with autism and intellectual disabilities

The prevalence, and incidence, of mental ill-health in adults with intellectual disabilities and autism were compared with the whole population with intellectual disabilities, and with controls, matched individually for age, gender, ability-level, and Down syndrome. Although the adults with autism had a higher point prevalence of problem behaviours compared with the whole adult population with intellectual disabilities, compared with individually matched controls there was no difference in prevalence, or incidence of either problem behaviours or other mental ill-health. Adults with autism who had problem behaviours were less likely to recover over a two-year period than were their matched controls. Apparent differences in rates of mental ill-health are accounted for by factors other than autism, including Down syndrome and ability level

Does risk and urgency of requested out-of-hours general practitioners care differ for people with intellectual disabilities in residential settings compared with the general population in the Netherlands? A cross-sectional routine data-based study

Contains fulltext : 182289.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether people with intellectual disabilities (ID) in residential setting were more likely than people from the general population to request out-of-hours general practitioner (GP) care and whether these requests had a similar level of urgency. DESIGN: Cross-sectional routine data-based study. SETTING: Two GP cooperatives providing out-of-hours primary care in an area in the Netherlands. POPULATION: 432 582 persons living in the out-of-hours service areas, of which 1448 could be identified as having an ID. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: GP cooperative records of all contacts in 2014 for people with and without ID were used to calculate the relative risk of requesting care and the associated level of urgency. RESULTS: Of the people with ID (448/1448), 30.9% requested out-of-hours GP care, whereas for the general population this was 18.4% (79 206/431 134), resulting in a relative risk of 1.7 (95% CI 1.6 to 1.8). We found a different distribution of urgency level for people with and without ID. Generally, requests for people with ID were rated as less urgent. CONCLUSION: People with ID in residential setting were more likely to request out-of-hours GP care than the general population. The distribution of the urgency level of requests differed between the two groups. The high percentage of demands relating to people with ID requesting counselling and advice suggests that some out-of-hours GP care may be avoidable. However, more insight is needed into the nature of out-of-hours primary care requests of people with ID to direct structural and reasonable adjustments towards the improvement of health information exchange in and around-the-clock access to primary care for people with ID

Exploring academics' views on designs, methods, characteristics and outcomes of inclusive health research with people with intellectual disabilities : a modified Delphi study

Background The British Medical Journal's (BMJ's) patient revolution strives for collaboration with patients in healthcare and health research. This paper studies collaboration with people with intellectual disabilities (ID) in health research, also known as inclusive health research. Currently, transparency and agreement among academics is lacking regarding its main aspects, preventing upscaling of the patient revolution. Objective This study aims to gain agreement among academics on 3 aspects of inclusive health research for people with ID: (1) designs and methods, (2) most important characteristics and (3) outcomes. Design A Delphi study was conducted with academics with experience in inclusive (health) research and on people with ID. The study consisted of 2 sequential questionnaire rounds (n=24; n=17), followed by in-depth interviews (n=10). Results Academics agreed on (1) a collaborative approach to be most suitable to inclusive health research, (2) characteristics regarding the accessibility and facilitation of inclusive health research, and (3) several outcomes of inclusive health research for people with ID and healthcare. Other characteristics agreed on included: atmosphere, relationship, engagement, partnership and power. It was stressed that these characteristics ensure meaningful inclusion. Interviewed academics voiced the need for a tool supporting the facilitation and evaluation of inclusive health research. There was ambiguity as to what this tool should comprise and the extent to which it was possible to capture the complex process of inclusive health research. Discussion and conclusions This study underlines the need for transparency, facilitation and evaluation of inclusive health research. The need for in-depth interviews after 2 Delphi rounds underlines its complexity and context dependence. To increase process transparency, future research should focus on gaining insight into inclusive health research in its context. A tool could be developed to facilitate and evaluate inclusive health research. This tool will be partially applicable to participatory research in general and thereby upscale the patient revolution