Introduction: Psychotropic medications are commonly prescribed among adults with intellectual disability (ID), often in the absence of a psychiatric diagnosis. As such, there is great disparity between the estimated prevalence of mental illness and the rates of psychotropic medication use amongst people with ID. ‘Off-label’ use of these medications may account for much of this discrepancy, in particular their use in the management of challenging behaviour. This has come under scrutiny due to the myriad of side effects and the deficiency of high-quality data supporting their use for this indication. Understanding the causes and justifications for such disparity is essential in discerning the efficacy of current prescription practice. Objective: To explore the existing evidence base regarding the prescription and management of psychotropic medications in adults with ID. The aim will be achieved through identifying the psychotropic medications commonly prescribed, the underlying rationale(s) for their prescription and the evidence available that demonstrates their appropriateness and effectiveness. Additionally, the paper will seek to evaluate the availability of any existing guidance that informs the management of these medications, and the evidence and outcomes of psychotropic medication dose reduction and/or cessation interventions. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider studies that focus on the use of psychotropic medications amongst patients with ID. Methods: Research studies (qualitative, quantitative and mixed design) and Grey Literature (English) will be included. The search will be conducted without time restrictions. Databases will include: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Databased of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO and Scopus. A three-step search strategy will be followed, with results screened by two independent reviewers. Data will be extracted independently by two reviewers using a data extraction tool with results mapped and presented using a narrative form supported by tables and diagrams.

Introduction: Psychotropic medications are commonly prescribed among adults with intellectual disability (ID), often in the absence of a psychiatric diagnosis. As such, there is great disparity between the estimated prevalence of mental illness and the rates of psychotropic medication use amongst people with ID. ‘Off-label’ use of these medications may account for much of this discrepancy, in particular their use in the management of challenging behaviour. This has come under scrutiny due to the myriad of side effects and the deficiency of high-quality data supporting their use for this indication. Understanding the causes and justifications for such disparity is essential in discerning the efficacy of current prescription practice. Objective: To explore the existing evidence base regarding the prescription and management of psychotropic medications in adults with ID. The aim will be achieved through identifying the psychotropic medications commonly prescribed, the underlying rationale(s) for their prescription and the evidence available that demonstrates their appropriateness and effectiveness. Additionally, the paper will seek to evaluate the availability of any existing guidance that informs the management of these medications, and the evidence and outcomes of psychotropic medication dose reduction and/or cessation interventions. Inclusion criteria: This review will consider studies that focus on the use of psychotropic medications amongst patients with ID. Methods: Research studies (qualitative, quantitative and mixed design) and Grey Literature (English) will be included. The search will be conducted without time restrictions. Databases will include: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Databased of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO and Scopus. A three-step search strategy will be followed, with results screened by two independent reviewers. Data will be extracted independently by two reviewers using a data extraction tool with results mapped and presented using a narrative form supported by tables and diagrams.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract