From premise to practice: Applicability of a consensus statement for supporting adults with IDD who are frail

Abstract

Background Study of frailty in adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) is relatively new. To build the body of literature, an international consensus statement on how to support adults with IDD as they become frail was developed based on fictional cases. This study examined the face validity and applicability of the consensus statement to real‐world care planning. Method Twenty‐three care plans for adults with IDD who were classified along the frailty continuum were reviewed. Documented goals, actions and outcomes were coded according to the consensus statement's principles and recommendations. Results The recommendations ‘Improvement and maintenance are viable goals’ and ‘Intersectoral collaboration is needed’ were documented the most often. Attention to the needs of formal and informal caregivers was mentioned the least often in care plans. Conclusions This study provides some support for the face validity of the consensus statement and its applicability to supporting adults with IDD who are frail.

Definition, assessment and management of frailty for people with intellectual disabilities: A scoping review

“…The ID‐Frailty Index, the ID‐FI Short Form and the HC‐IDD Frailty Index are all similar in that they take a holistic approach to frailty by investigating social, psychological, and cognitive deficits as well as physical. Therefore, a definition such as that outlined in Table 3 by Barabash et al (2021) is most appropriate for these measures: the acquisition of age‐related health deficits across multiple domains (e.g., biological, psychological, social and cognitive) .…”

“…The majority of people with intellectual disabilities included in these studies were in receipt of a range of health and social care. Many of the studies set in Canada were focused on individuals specifically in receipt of community‐based care, or those who worked with or supported them (Ouellette‐Kuntz, Martin, & McKenzie, 2018; Ouellette‐Kuntz, Stankiewicz, et al, 2018; Martin et al, 2018, 2020; Barabash et al, 2021). Hippisley‐Cox and Coupland (2017) included people on primary care registers, but it is not known what other health or care services they were receiving.…”

“…The consensus statement consists of two principles ('a person-centered approach to planning' and 'ageing in place') and seven recommendations. Barabash et al (2021) examined the applicability of this consensus statement within 23 care plans of individuals with intellectual disabilities who were frail. They found that the recommendations 'improvement and maintenance are viable goals' and 'intersectoral collaboration is needed' were most commonly evidently in care plans.…”