Siobhan MacRae1, Michael Brown2, Thanos Karatzias3, Laurence Taggart4, Maria Truesdale-Kennedy4, Robert Walley5, Anna Sierka1, Ruth Northway6, Marian Carey7, Melanie Davies8. 1. Edinburgh Napier University, Faculty of Health, Life and Social Sciences, UK. 2. Edinburgh Napier University, Faculty of Health, Life and Social Sciences, UK; NHS Lothian Specialist Learning Disability Services, UK. Electronic address: M.brown@napier.ac.uk. 3. Edinburgh Napier University, Faculty of Health, Life and Social Sciences, UK; NHS Lothian, Rivers Centre for Traumatic Stress, UK. 4. University of Ulster, Institute of Nursing and Health Research, UK. 5. Edinburgh Napier University, Faculty of Health, Life and Social Sciences, UK; NHS Lothian East and Midlothian Community Learning Disability Teams, UK. 6. University of South Wales, Faculty of Life Sciences and Education, UK. 7. Leicester Diabetes Centre, University Hospitals of Leicester, UK. 8. Leicester Diabetes Centre, University Hospitals of Leicester, UK; University of Leicester, Diabetes Research Centre, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present an analysis of the evidence related to the prevalence of diabetes in people with intellectual disabilities (ID), their experiences of their condition and treatment and those of their carers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted. A total of 22 studies exploring diabetes prevalence and 5 exploring views and experiences of diabetes in people with ID were identified and included. A narrative synthesis approach was utilised to amalgamate data extracted from the included studies regarding some 49,046 participants with ID and diabetes and 31 care professionals and family members across Europe, North America, New Zealand, Australia, China and Hong Kong. RESULTS: Prevalence rates of diabetes in people with ID were highly varied, ranging from 0.4% to 25%. 7 studies reported significantly higher rates of diabetes in people with ID than the general population. People with ID reported a basic understanding of diabetes and wanted to know more. Carers reported that they lack diabetes knowledge and do not routinely encourage diabetes self-management skills. Several studies neglected to report vital demographic information such as participants' level of ID (13 studies) and diabetes type (16 studies) and the quality of included prevalence studies was variable. CONCLUSIONS: Further research in this field is required, notably prevalence studies which control for participant demographics and personal situations to obtain more accurate diabetes prevalence rates in this population group. People with ID and diabetes should be encouraged to participate in future research and we recommend exploring the feasibility of adapting current mainstream diabetes management programmes for these individuals.
OBJECTIVE: To present an analysis of the evidence related to the prevalence of diabetes in people with intellectual disabilities (ID), their experiences of their condition and treatment and those of their carers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted. A total of 22 studies exploring diabetes prevalence and 5 exploring views and experiences of diabetes in people with ID were identified and included. A narrative synthesis approach was utilised to amalgamate data extracted from the included studies regarding some 49,046 participants with ID and diabetes and 31 care professionals and family members across Europe, North America, New Zealand, Australia, China and Hong Kong. RESULTS: Prevalence rates of diabetes in people with ID were highly varied, ranging from 0.4% to 25%. 7 studies reported significantly higher rates of diabetes in people with ID than the general population. People with ID reported a basic understanding of diabetes and wanted to know more. Carers reported that they lack diabetes knowledge and do not routinely encourage diabetes self-management skills. Several studies neglected to report vital demographic information such as participants' level of ID (13 studies) and diabetes type (16 studies) and the quality of included prevalence studies was variable. CONCLUSIONS: Further research in this field is required, notably prevalence studies which control for participant demographics and personal situations to obtain more accurate diabetes prevalence rates in this population group. People with ID and diabetes should be encouraged to participate in future research and we recommend exploring the feasibility of adapting current mainstream diabetes management programmes for these individuals.
Authors: Nanna Lindekilde; Stine H Scheuer; Femke Rutters; Lenette Knudsen; Mathias Lasgaard; Katrine H Rubin; Jan Erik Henriksen; Mika Kivimäki; Gregers S Andersen; Frans Pouwer Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2021-11-29 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Milou van den Bemd; Maarten Cuypers; Erik W M A Bischoff; Marloes Heutmekers; Bianca Schalk; Geraline L Leusink Journal: J Appl Res Intellect Disabil Date: 2021-11-08
Authors: L D Bryant; A M Russell; R E A Walwyn; A J Farrin; A Wright-Hughes; E H Graham; D Nagi; A Stansfield; J Birtwistle; S Meer; R A Ajjan; A O House Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2017-10-08 Impact factor: 4.359