Health characteristics and consultation patterns of people with intellectual disability: a cross-sectional database study in English general practice

I. Carey, Sunil M. Shah, F. Hosking, S. DeWilde, T. Harris, C. Beighton, D. Cook
{"title":"Health characteristics and consultation patterns of people with intellectual disability: a cross-sectional database study in English general practice","authors":"I. Carey, Sunil M. Shah, F. Hosking, S. DeWilde, T. Harris, C. Beighton, D. Cook","doi":"10.3399/bjgp16X684301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background People with intellectual disability (ID) are a group with high levels of healthcare needs; however, comprehensive information on these needs and service use is very limited. Aim To describe chronic disease, comorbidity, disability, and general practice use among people with ID compared with the general population. Design and setting This study is a cross-sectional analysis of a primary care database including 408 English general practices in 2012. Method A total of 14 751 adults with ID, aged 18–84 years, were compared with 86 221 age-, sex- and practice-matched controls. Depending on the outcome, prevalence (PR), risk (RR), or odds (OR) ratios comparing patients with ID with matched controls are shown. Results Patients with ID had a markedly higher prevalence of recorded epilepsy (18.5%, PR 25.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 23.29 to 27.57), severe mental illness (8.6%, PR 9.10, 95% CI = 8.34 to 9.92), and dementia (1.1%, PR 7.52, 95% CI = 5.95 to 9.49), as well as moderately increased rates of hypothyroidism and heart failure (PR>2.0). However, recorded prevalence of ischaemic heart disease and cancer was approximately 30% lower than the general population. The average annual number of primary care consultations was 6.29 for patients with ID, compared with 3.89 for matched controls. Patients with ID were less likely to have longer doctor consultations (OR 0.73, 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.77), and had lower continuity of care with the same doctor (OR 0.77, 95% CI = 0.73 to 0.82). Conclusion Compared with the general population, people with ID have generally higher overall levels of chronic disease and greater primary care use. Ensuring access to high-quality chronic disease management, especially for epilepsy and mental illness, will help address these greater healthcare needs. Continuity of care and longer appointment times are important potential improvements in primary care.","PeriodicalId":22333,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of General Practice","volume":"60 1","pages":"e264 - e270"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"76","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp16X684301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 76

Abstract

Background People with intellectual disability (ID) are a group with high levels of healthcare needs; however, comprehensive information on these needs and service use is very limited. Aim To describe chronic disease, comorbidity, disability, and general practice use among people with ID compared with the general population. Design and setting This study is a cross-sectional analysis of a primary care database including 408 English general practices in 2012. Method A total of 14 751 adults with ID, aged 18–84 years, were compared with 86 221 age-, sex- and practice-matched controls. Depending on the outcome, prevalence (PR), risk (RR), or odds (OR) ratios comparing patients with ID with matched controls are shown. Results Patients with ID had a markedly higher prevalence of recorded epilepsy (18.5%, PR 25.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 23.29 to 27.57), severe mental illness (8.6%, PR 9.10, 95% CI = 8.34 to 9.92), and dementia (1.1%, PR 7.52, 95% CI = 5.95 to 9.49), as well as moderately increased rates of hypothyroidism and heart failure (PR>2.0). However, recorded prevalence of ischaemic heart disease and cancer was approximately 30% lower than the general population. The average annual number of primary care consultations was 6.29 for patients with ID, compared with 3.89 for matched controls. Patients with ID were less likely to have longer doctor consultations (OR 0.73, 95% CI = 0.69 to 0.77), and had lower continuity of care with the same doctor (OR 0.77, 95% CI = 0.73 to 0.82). Conclusion Compared with the general population, people with ID have generally higher overall levels of chronic disease and greater primary care use. Ensuring access to high-quality chronic disease management, especially for epilepsy and mental illness, will help address these greater healthcare needs. Continuity of care and longer appointment times are important potential improvements in primary care.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智力残疾者的健康特征和咨询模式:英语全科医学的横断面数据库研究
智力残疾者(ID)是一个医疗保健需求较高的群体;但是,关于这些需求和服务使用情况的全面资料非常有限。目的描述ID患者与普通人群相比的慢性疾病、合并症、残疾和一般实践使用情况。本研究是对2012年包含408名英国全科医生的初级保健数据库进行横断面分析。方法将14 751名18-84岁的成年ID患者与86 221名年龄、性别和实践相匹配的对照组进行比较。根据结果,显示ID患者与匹配对照组的患病率(PR)、风险(RR)或比值(or)比。结果癫痫(18.5%,PR 25.33, 95%可信区间[CI] = 23.29 ~ 27.57)、严重精神疾病(8.6%,PR 9.10, 95% CI = 8.34 ~ 9.92)、痴呆(1.1%,PR 7.52, 95% CI = 5.95 ~ 9.49)、甲状腺功能减退和心力衰竭(PR>2.0)的发生率明显增高。然而,有记录的缺血性心脏病和癌症的患病率比一般人群低约30%。ID患者的平均年初级保健咨询次数为6.29次,而匹配对照组为3.89次。ID患者就诊时间较长的可能性较小(OR 0.73, 95% CI = 0.69至0.77),且与同一位医生的连续性较低(OR 0.77, 95% CI = 0.73至0.82)。结论与一般人群相比,ID患者总体慢性疾病水平较高,且使用初级保健服务较多。确保获得高质量的慢性病管理,特别是癫痫和精神疾病的管理,将有助于满足这些更大的卫生保健需求。护理的连续性和更长的预约时间是初级保健的重要潜在改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: leading the fight in primary care Dealing with symptoms in the general population: lessons learned from the Danish Symptom Cohort Towards new definitions of avoidable hospital admissions Diagnosing myeloma in general practice: how might earlier diagnosis be achieved? General practice and the Medical Licensing Assessment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1