Anna Wiegand, Philipp Mathmann, Susanne Wasmuth, Lukas Prein, Ross Parfitt, Martin Scharpenberg, Vincent Jankovic, Katharina Schwarze, Anja Neumann, Karolin Schäfer, Christian Speckemeier, Sven Baessler, Sarah Schlierenkamp, Sandra Diekmann, Nicole Stuhrmann, Ruth Lang-Roth, Muhittin Demir, Werner Brannath, Awa Naghipour, Susanna Marie Zielonkowski, Anna Sophia Schwalen, Corinna Gietmann, Katrin Neumann
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Individuals with intellectual disabilities are at higher risk of undiagnosed or inadequately treated hearing loss. This situation requires easily accessible hearing screening, diagnostics and intervention programmes in the living environment, i.e., in nurseries, schools, workplaces and homes. However, a full audiometric assessment is not always possible in nonclinical settings. The multicentre cohort study HörGeist investigated the effectiveness, feasibility and costs of an outreach programme of repeated hearing screening, diagnostics, intervention and monitoring of children, adolescents and adults with intellectual disabilities in their living environment in comparison with an invitation-only programme comprising a control cohort in a clinical setting and with standard care. This paper reports on the HörGeist substudy of the outreach cohort, focusing on participants referred for 'external' diagnostics in clinical settings after failing on-site screening, and evaluating both referral uptake and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Because none of the 141 individuals in the control cohort provided informed consent to attend the programme in a clinical setting, our results pertain solely to the outcomes and feasibility within the outreach cohort. All of the 1053 participants in the outreach cohort who failed the hearing screening tests underwent full on-site audiometric assessment. Where on-site screening and/or diagnostics were not feasible, referrals to external medical institutions were provided. Participants who were referred to external diagnostics were tracked via telephone interviews using a questionnaire and asked about their utilisation and the outcome of diagnostics. In cases where referrals were not pursued, reasons for non-compliance were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A referral for external diagnostics was received by 262 of the 1053 participants of the outreach cohort. Of these, 19 dropped out of the study. Of the 248 referrals received by the remaining 243 participants, 93 (37.5%) were attended and 155 (62.5%) were not. The main reasons for non-attendance were 'no attempt to arrange an appointment' (32.9%), 'refusal by caregivers' (23.2%) and 'refusal by participants' (18.1%). Approximately 4% did not receive an appointment for external diagnostics. Referral uptake declined with age, with uptake rates of 50.8% in young children, 41.3% in school-aged participants and 24.7% in adults. Telephone tracking of a subsample of 48 participants who primarily did not attend for external assessment led to further clinical diagnostics in eight cases (16.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In order to achieve an improvement in the hearing situation of people with intellectual disabilities, a screening, diagnostic and intervention programme in their living environment seems both feasible and beneficial. However, reliable assessment of the hearing status of the participants of such a programme re
{"title":"Clinical Diagnostics After Failed Hearing Screening in People With Intellectual Disabilities Do Not Often Take Place.","authors":"Anna Wiegand, Philipp Mathmann, Susanne Wasmuth, Lukas Prein, Ross Parfitt, Martin Scharpenberg, Vincent Jankovic, Katharina Schwarze, Anja Neumann, Karolin Schäfer, Christian Speckemeier, Sven Baessler, Sarah Schlierenkamp, Sandra Diekmann, Nicole Stuhrmann, Ruth Lang-Roth, Muhittin Demir, Werner Brannath, Awa Naghipour, Susanna Marie Zielonkowski, Anna Sophia Schwalen, Corinna Gietmann, Katrin Neumann","doi":"10.1111/jir.70078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.70078","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Individuals with intellectual disabilities are at higher risk of undiagnosed or inadequately treated hearing loss. This situation requires easily accessible hearing screening, diagnostics and intervention programmes in the living environment, i.e., in nurseries, schools, workplaces and homes. However, a full audiometric assessment is not always possible in nonclinical settings. The multicentre cohort study HörGeist investigated the effectiveness, feasibility and costs of an outreach programme of repeated hearing screening, diagnostics, intervention and monitoring of children, adolescents and adults with intellectual disabilities in their living environment in comparison with an invitation-only programme comprising a control cohort in a clinical setting and with standard care. This paper reports on the HörGeist substudy of the outreach cohort, focusing on participants referred for 'external' diagnostics in clinical settings after failing on-site screening, and evaluating both referral uptake and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Because none of the 141 individuals in the control cohort provided informed consent to attend the programme in a clinical setting, our results pertain solely to the outcomes and feasibility within the outreach cohort. All of the 1053 participants in the outreach cohort who failed the hearing screening tests underwent full on-site audiometric assessment. Where on-site screening and/or diagnostics were not feasible, referrals to external medical institutions were provided. Participants who were referred to external diagnostics were tracked via telephone interviews using a questionnaire and asked about their utilisation and the outcome of diagnostics. In cases where referrals were not pursued, reasons for non-compliance were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A referral for external diagnostics was received by 262 of the 1053 participants of the outreach cohort. Of these, 19 dropped out of the study. Of the 248 referrals received by the remaining 243 participants, 93 (37.5%) were attended and 155 (62.5%) were not. The main reasons for non-attendance were 'no attempt to arrange an appointment' (32.9%), 'refusal by caregivers' (23.2%) and 'refusal by participants' (18.1%). Approximately 4% did not receive an appointment for external diagnostics. Referral uptake declined with age, with uptake rates of 50.8% in young children, 41.3% in school-aged participants and 24.7% in adults. Telephone tracking of a subsample of 48 participants who primarily did not attend for external assessment led to further clinical diagnostics in eight cases (16.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In order to achieve an improvement in the hearing situation of people with intellectual disabilities, a screening, diagnostic and intervention programme in their living environment seems both feasible and beneficial. However, reliable assessment of the hearing status of the participants of such a programme re","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145989706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Naomi van den Broek, Fokke van Meulen, Marco Ross, Sebastiaan Overeem, Pedro Fonseca
Background: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is highly prevalent in people with intellectual disabilities, and when left untreated, negatively influences daily activities and social interactions. Polysomnography (PSG) remains the diagnostic gold standard but can be an obtrusive and strenuous endeavour in people with intellectual disabilities, related to factors such as communicative impairment, anxiety, challenging behaviour and sensory hypersensitivity. Alternative methods to assess OSA severity by estimating the apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) have been proposed, based on heart and respiration rate variability signals. These signals could potentially be obtained with less obtrusive monitoring devices. We investigated whether this approach is also suitable in people with intellectual disabilities.
Methods: We analysed overnight PSG data from 73 participants with intellectual disabilities. AHI was predicted by an algorithm trained to use cardiorespiratory inputs (from electrocardiogram and respiratory induction plethysmography) to detect the occurrence of sleep-disordered breathing events and total sleep time. It was compared to the PSG-derived AHI by means of Spearman's correlation and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). The diagnostic capacity of the algorithm to differentiate between OSA severity groups was evaluated using Cohen's κ coefficient of agreement and accuracy, using near-boundary double labelling, with the following boundaries: 'no OR mild OSA' 2.4 ≤ AHI < 7.0, 'mild OR moderate OSA' 12.4 ≤ AHI < 17.4 and 'moderate OR severe OSA', 26.6 ≤ AHI < 35.2.
Results: The algorithm achieved a strong Spearman's correlation between the predicted and PSG-derived AHI of 0.76 (p < 0.001) and a moderate ICC of 0.74 (p < 0.001). Differentiation in OSA severity classes was done with a κ of 0.58 and accuracy of 68.5%, indicating a moderate level of agreement.
Conclusions: We show the potential of determining the severity of OSA in people with intellectual disabilities by estimating AHI using an algorithm based on surrogate cardiorespiratory signals. This allows the development of less obtrusive diagnostic modalities focusing only on cardiorespiratory inputs to assess OSA severity.
{"title":"Heart and Respiration Rate Variability Analysis to Estimate the Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index in People With Intellectual Disabilities.","authors":"Naomi van den Broek, Fokke van Meulen, Marco Ross, Sebastiaan Overeem, Pedro Fonseca","doi":"10.1111/jir.70077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.70077","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is highly prevalent in people with intellectual disabilities, and when left untreated, negatively influences daily activities and social interactions. Polysomnography (PSG) remains the diagnostic gold standard but can be an obtrusive and strenuous endeavour in people with intellectual disabilities, related to factors such as communicative impairment, anxiety, challenging behaviour and sensory hypersensitivity. Alternative methods to assess OSA severity by estimating the apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) have been proposed, based on heart and respiration rate variability signals. These signals could potentially be obtained with less obtrusive monitoring devices. We investigated whether this approach is also suitable in people with intellectual disabilities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analysed overnight PSG data from 73 participants with intellectual disabilities. AHI was predicted by an algorithm trained to use cardiorespiratory inputs (from electrocardiogram and respiratory induction plethysmography) to detect the occurrence of sleep-disordered breathing events and total sleep time. It was compared to the PSG-derived AHI by means of Spearman's correlation and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). The diagnostic capacity of the algorithm to differentiate between OSA severity groups was evaluated using Cohen's κ coefficient of agreement and accuracy, using near-boundary double labelling, with the following boundaries: 'no OR mild OSA' 2.4 ≤ AHI < 7.0, 'mild OR moderate OSA' 12.4 ≤ AHI < 17.4 and 'moderate OR severe OSA', 26.6 ≤ AHI < 35.2.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The algorithm achieved a strong Spearman's correlation between the predicted and PSG-derived AHI of 0.76 (p < 0.001) and a moderate ICC of 0.74 (p < 0.001). Differentiation in OSA severity classes was done with a κ of 0.58 and accuracy of 68.5%, indicating a moderate level of agreement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We show the potential of determining the severity of OSA in people with intellectual disabilities by estimating AHI using an algorithm based on surrogate cardiorespiratory signals. This allows the development of less obtrusive diagnostic modalities focusing only on cardiorespiratory inputs to assess OSA severity.</p>","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2026-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145966247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}