[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To assess the attitudes of upper-year undergraduate medical students (ie, clerks) toward the philosophy of community inclusion of persons with intellectual disabilities (ID) according to demographic, personal contact, and training variables.
Cross-sectional self-administered survey.
Clerkship rotations at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont, and the University of Toronto in Ontario in 2006.
A total of 258 clerks.
Scores on the Community Living Attitudes Scale-Short Form.
There were no differences in the Community Living Attitudes Scale-Short Form subscale scores across categories of demographic characteristics, personal contact, or having received didactic training about ID. Clerks who had seen patients with ID during their medical school training had higher mean sheltering subscale scores than those who had not (3.27 vs 3.07, P = .02). Additional analysis revealed that 88.5% of clerks who had seen patients with ID reported seeing 5 or fewer such patients, and that those who rated the quality of their supervision more positively had higher mean scores on the empowerment subscale and lower mean scores on the sheltering subscale.
Although specific training has the potential to promote more socially progressive attitudes regarding persons with ID, lower-quality supervision is associated with higher endorsement of items expressing the need to shelter individuals with ID from harm and lower endorsement of items promoting empowerment.
Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien 05/2012; 58(5):e282-8. · 1.34 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background The population of older adults with intellectual disabilities is growing, creating new challenges for individuals, families and service providers. Although there has been increased research into the ageing process for adults with intellectual disabilities, there is little focused research investigating physical mobility.
Materials and Methods A proxy-response telephone survey was conducted to establish the prevalence and severity of mobility limitations among adults with intellectual disabilities, aged 45 years and over, using validated instruments to quantify mobility in a representative population-based sample.
Results Surveys were completed for 128 people. Mobility limitations were common, but the prevalence varied depending on the definition of mobility limitation. The prevalence of limitations was greater among females than males, but no clear age trend was seen.
Conclusions The common nature of mobility limitations among the growing population of older adults with intellectual disabilities has implications for service providers and policy-makers.
Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 06/2009; 22(5):477 - 486. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-3148.2009.00499.x · 1.38 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Mobility limitations increase with age in the general population. Despite a growing population of older adults with intellectual disabilities (ID), mobility is rarely studied in the ID literature. The specific aim of this study was to identify and summarise primary literature investigating mobility limitations in adults with ID.
This study was a systematic review of the epidemiological literature (incidence and prevalence) of mobility limitations among adults with ID. Four electronic databases were searched from January 1980 to May 2007 for publications according to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Additional sources were consulted. Two reviewers extracted data from each of the included articles.
Thirty-two publications representing 31 studies were ultimately included. In general, studies did not focus on mobility but were conducted for other purposes. All studies were conducted in industrialised countries. Only one study used a longitudinal design; the remainders were cross-sectional. Few investigators reported on the representativeness of the sample or the validity of the measurement tool. Study samples differed substantially and investigators used numerous definitions of mobility limiting comparability between studies.
There is a need for increased research on mobility limitations among adults with ID, particularly longitudinal research. Researchers investigating mobility limitations should use validated measurement tools and offer detailed descriptions of the study sample and how it compares with an identifiable population.
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 02/2009; 53(2):93-105. DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01137.x · 2.41 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: As the population ages, mobility limitations are associated with increased mortality and negative health-related states both in the general population and among people with intellectual disabilities. The influence of mobility limitations upon the lives and lifestyles of people with intellectual disabilities remains poorly understood. Specifically, the extent to which mobility limitations might limit residential options for individuals and families has not been evaluated. To determine the relationship between mobility limitations and place of residence for adults with intellectual disabilities, age 45 and older, a proxy-response telephone survey was completed for 128 adults with intellectual disabilities in Southeastern Ontario. A participant's place of residence was categorized as being “high support” (group homes and nursing homes) or “low support” (living alone, with family, roommates, or host family). People with a score of 12 or less on the Rivermead Mobility Index were considered to have a mobility limitation. The relationship between mobility limitations and high-support residential settings was analyzed using a multivariate logistic regression model. After adjusting for age, sex, and presence of cerebral palsy, communication problems and behavior problems, people with mobility problems had 3.6 times greater odds of living in high-support settings. Authors concluded that mobility limitations are associated with residence in “high-support” settings and that further investigation is needed to determine the direction of causality and to create programs and services that equalize opportunities.
Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities 11/2008; 5(4):253 - 258. DOI:10.1111/j.1741-1130.2008.00186.x · 0.97 Impact Factor