Adverse drug event-related hospitalisation in persons with neurodevelopmental disorders: a state-wide retrospective cohort study

Rating scales to measure adverse effects of medications in people with intellectual disability: a scoping review

Purpose

Intellectual disability (ID) is a chronic neurodevelopmental condition characterised by limitations in intelligence and adaptive skills with an onset prior to the age of 18 years. People with ID have complex healthcare needs and are more likely than the general population to experience multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy, with subsequent increased risk of adverse medication effects. The aim of this scoping review is to characterise rating scales used to measure adverse effects of medication in people with ID.

Methods

Four online databases (PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science and OpenGrey) were searched in April 2020. Studies were assessed for inclusion against pre-specified eligibility criteria. Reference lists of included studies were hand searched. Data extraction was carried out by two independent reviewers and key findings were tabulated for consideration. Studies were assessed for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

Results

The search resulted in 512 unique records, of which fifteen met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen scales were identified. All scales assessed adverse effects of psychotropics only. Of the scales, only one, the Matson Evaluation of Drug Side Effects, which focuses on psychotropic medications, was originally developed for use in a population with ID.

Conclusion

The Matson Evaluation of Drug Side Effects scale appears to be the most reliable and well-researched scale in people with ID. However, a scale which measures adverse effects across multiple medication classes would be valuable for use in this population.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03375-2.

Hospital psychosocial interventions for patients with brain functional impairment: A retrospective cohort study

Psychosocial interventions could improve health and care outcomes, however, little is known about their use for patients with complex needs in the acute hospital care setting. This study aimed to evaluate factors associated with psychosocial intervention use when treating patients with brain functional impairment during their hospital care. The all-inclusive New South Wales (NSW) Admitted Patient Data were employed to identify patients with neurodevelopment disorders, brain degenerative disorders, or traumatic brain injuries admitted to NSW public hospitals for acute care from July 2001 to June 2014. We considered receipt of psychosocial interventions as the primary outcome, and used mixed effect logistic models to quantify factors in relation to outcome. Of important note, psychosocial intervention use was more common in principal hospitals, and amongst those receiving intensive care or having comorbid mental disorders in the study populations. Approximate 70.8% of patients with traumatic brain injuries did not receive psychosocial interventions, despite attempts to target those in need and an overall increasing trend in adoption. Continuing efforts are warranted to improve service delivery and uptake.