Self-Harm Among 17-Year-Old Adolescents With/Without Disabilities in the United Kingdom.

Background: Self-harm is a critical public health issue for adolescents/young adults. Aims: To estimate the prevalence of self-harm among adolescents with/without disabilities in the United Kingdom. Method: Secondary analysis of data collected at age 17 in the UK's Millennium Cohort Study. Results: Prevalence of self-harm was significantly greater among adolescents with disabilities for suicide attempts and six forms of self-harming behaviors. The lifetime prevalence of suicide attempts was 5.3% (4.5-6.3) among adolescents without disabilities, 21.9% (18.2-26.2) among adolescents with less limiting disabilities, and 25.5% (17.2-35.9) among adolescents with more limiting disabilities. Adjusted prevalence rate ratios ranged from 5.13 (3.58-7.36) for those with mental health limitations to 1.48 (0.65-3.35) for those with mobility limitations. Similar patterns were observed for the 12-month prevalence of six self-harming behaviors. Limitations: Further studies are needed to identify potential mediators of the association between disability and self-harm that are potentially modifiable. Conclusion: Adolescents with disabilities are at markedly greater probability of suicide attempts and self-harming behaviors than their peers.

Disability-related inequalities in the prevalence of loneliness across the lifespan: trends from Australia, 2003 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: Experiencing loneliness can be distressing and increasing evidence indicates that being lonely is associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes. Cross-sectional studies have demonstrated that people with disability have increased risk of experiencing loneliness compared to people without disability. However, we do not know if these inequalities have changed over time. This study investigated the prevalence of loneliness for people with disability in Australia annually from 2003 to 2020 to examine whether disability-related inequalities in loneliness have changed over time, and disaggregated results for subgroups of people with disability by age group, sex, and disability group. METHODS: We used annual data (2003-2020) from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey. Loneliness was measured by a single question assessing the subjective experience of loneliness. For each wave, we calculated population-weighted age-standardised estimates of the proportion of people experiencing loneliness for people with and without disability. We then calculated the absolute and relative inequalities in loneliness between people with and without disability for each wave. Analyses were stratified by 10-year age groups, sex, and disability group (sensory or speech, physical, intellectual or learning, psychological, brain injury or stroke, other). RESULTS: From 2003 to 2020, the prevalence of loneliness was greater for people with disability, such that people with disability were 1.5 to 1.9 times more likely to experience loneliness than people without disability. While the prevalence of loneliness decreased for people without disability between 2003 and 2020, the prevalence of loneliness did not decrease for people with disability during this period. Inequalities in loneliness were more substantial for people with intellectual or learning disabilities, psychological disability, and brain injury or stroke. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that people with disability have increased risk of loneliness compared to people without disability. We add to the existing evidence by demonstrating that disability-related inequalities in loneliness have persisted for two decades in Australia without improvement. Our findings indicate that addressing inequalities in loneliness for people with disability is a critical public health concern given that loneliness is associated with a wide range of poor health outcomes.

Integrating rehabilitation into health systems: A comparative study of nine middle-income countries using WHO's Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The need for rehabilitation is growing due to health and demographic trends, especially the rise of non-communicable diseases and the rapid ageing of the global population. However, the extent to which rehabilitation is integrated into health systems is mostly unclear. Our objective is to describe and compare the nature and extent of integration of rehabilitation within health systems across nine middle-income countries using available Systematic Assessment of Rehabilitation Situation (STARS) reports. METHODS: Cross-country comparative study with variable-oriented design using available rehabilitation health system assessment reports from nine middle income countries. FINDINGS: The integration of rehabilitation into health systems is limited across countries. Governance and financing for rehabilitation are mostly established within health ministries but weakly so, while health information systems are characterized by no available data or data that is insufficient or not routinely generated. The overall numbers of rehabilitation workforce per capita are low, with frequent reports of workforce challenges. In most countries the availability of longer-stay, high-intensity rehabilitation is extremely low, the availability of rehabilitation in tertiary hospitals is modest and in government supported primary care its almost non-existent. Multiple concerns about rehabilitation quality arose but the lack of empirical data hinders formal appraisal. CONCLUSION: The study sheds light on the limited integration of rehabilitation in health systems and common areas of difficulty and challenge across nine middle income countries. All countries were found to have a basis on which to strengthen rehabilitation and there were often multiple areas within each health system building block that required action in order to improve the situation. Findings can inform governments, regional and global agencies to support future efforts to strengthen rehabilitation. Additionally, our study demonstrates the value of STARS reports for health policy and systems research and can serve as a model for further comparative studies.

A Systematic Review of Interventions Addressing the Primary Prevention of Violence Against Women With Disability.

Women with disability experience significantly more violence and abuse than their nondisabled peers. Efforts to implement, evaluate, and scale-up strategies to prevent violence against women are rapidly expanding, but we know less about "what works" to prevent violence against women with disability. While secondary and tertiary prevention aim to identify violence early and prevent further occurrence, this review focuses on primary prevention. In the disability services sector, primary prevention is sometimes referred to as safeguarding and covers a range of activities that aim to address the underlying determinants of violence to prevent it from happening in the first place. The aim of this review is to identify and synthesize research on evaluated interventions addressing the primary prevention of violence against women with disability and explore evidence about their quality and effectiveness. A systematic search across the bibliographic databases of Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and PsychInfo for peer-reviewed literature published in English on or after January 1, 2010, yielded 483 papers of potential interest. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were considered for review. Data were extracted and the quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Most studies reported outcomes from pre- and post-test research designs and received a weak rating of quality. Although interventions targeting awareness, knowledge, and skill development showed evidence of effectiveness, there is a distinct lack of program development that draws on known risk factors for violence such as the intersection of ableism and gender inequality.

Disability and loneliness in the United Kingdom: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of trends and transitions.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness can have a detrimental impact on health, yet little is known about the association between disability and loneliness. METHODS: Secondary analysis of three waves of data collected between 2017 and 2020 by the UK's annual household panel study, Understanding Society. Direct age-standardisation was used to compare the prevalence of loneliness at each wave and the persistence of loneliness across all three waves for participants with/without disabilities aged 16-65 years. Transitional probabilities for the stability of loneliness, the stability of non-loneliness, the onset of loneliness and the offset of loneliness between consecutive waves were also estimated. RESULTS: At each wave, the prevalence of loneliness was significantly higher among respondents with disabilities than respondents without disabilities; these inequalities persisted with no evidence of change over time. The prevalence of persistent loneliness was 46% for respondents with disabilities compared with 22% for respondents without disabilities. Risk factors for the likelihood of persistent loneliness included disability, financial stress, not living as a couple, living in rented accommodation, being female and not being employed. The probability of the onset and stability of loneliness between successive waves were markedly higher for people with disabilities compared with people without disabilities. CONCLUSION: Adults with disabilities were more likely to experience loneliness, become lonely and remain lonely over time than their peers. Policies and interventions aimed at reducing loneliness should ensure that they are accessible and effective for people with disabilities. Further research is needed to explore the health outcomes of persistent loneliness among people with/without disabilities.

Health and wellbeing outcomes associated with loneliness for people with disability: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness is a significant public health concern due to its detrimental impact on health and wellbeing. Despite people with disability reporting higher levels of loneliness than the general population, there has been little research into how this is affecting their health and wellbeing. In light of this, the aim of our study was to scope both the existing evidence about the health and wellbeing outcomes associated with loneliness for people with disability, as well as the conceptual frameworks and measures utilised in this field of research. METHODS: To conduct this scoping review, we followed the methodology outlined by JBI and searched MEDLINE, Scopus, Informit, Embase, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed, English-language articles published between 1 January 2000 and 8 February 2023. Two independent reviewers completed screening, full-text review and data extraction, with consensus sought at each stage. Data were analysed using content analysis and presented both numerically and narratively. RESULTS: Out of the initial 1602 publications identified in the scoping review, only nine were included after duplicate removal, title and abstract screening, and full-text review. This limited number of studies, with the earliest study one published in 2015, represents a key finding. Eight of the nine studies were quantitative, and all were conducted in high income countries. Most of these studies utilised a version of the University of Los Angles Loneliness Scale to measure loneliness and addressed specific impairment groups. Notably, most of the studies identified associations between loneliness and health and wellbeing outcomes for people with disability. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review highlights the current scarcity of studies examining the effect that loneliness has on the health and wellbeing outcomes of people with disability. As most of the reviewed studies relied on loneliness measures designed for individuals without disability, they potentially overlook the unique life experiences of people with disability. Given that loneliness is an international public health concern, it is imperative that people with disability are not left behind or overlooked in efforts to address the impact of loneliness on health and wellbeing.

Parental Report of Signs of Anxiety and Depression in Children and Adolescents with and Without Disability in Middle- and Low-Income Countries: Meta-analysis of 44 Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Surveys.

Population-based studies undertaken in high-income countries have indicated that children and adolescents with disabilities are more likely than their non-disabled peers to experience emotional difficulties such as anxiety and depression. Very little is known about the association between disability and emotional difficulties among children growing up in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to estimate the strength of association between disability and two forms of emotional difficulties (anxiety, depression) in a range of LMICs and to determine whether the strength of this relationship was moderated by child age and gender. Secondary analysis of data collected in Round 6 of UNICEF's Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys undertaken in 44 LMICs (combined n = 349,421). Data were aggregated across countries by both mixed effects multi-level modelling and restricted maximum likelihood meta-analysis. Young people with disabilities, when compared with their non-disabled peers, were approximately two and a half times more likely to be reported by parents to show daily signs of either anxiety or depression. The level of risk among young people with disabilities was highest in upper middle-income countries and lowest in low-income countries. We estimated that approximately 20% of young people with frequent anxiety or depression also had a disability. All approaches to mental health interventions (from primary prevention to clinical interventions) need to make reasonable accommodations to their services to ensure that the young people with emotional difficulties who also have a disability are not 'left behind'.

Developing self-report disability questions for a voluntary patient registration form for general practice in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: This article reports on research undertaken to develop self-report disability questions for a patient registration form that may be implemented in general practices across Australia as part of a voluntary patient registration program. METHODS: There were four research components: rapid review of approaches for capturing disability information; expert informant interviews (n=19); stakeholder consultation via virtual focus groups (n=65); and online survey (n=35). Findings from each component informed development of materials for subsequent components in an iterative research process. RESULTS: Three disability questions were developed: two alternative questions for identifying disability, conceptually aligned with the operational definition of disability in Australia's national disability survey; one question to determine the patient's disability group/s. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge and perspectives from a variety of sources informed the development of self-report questions to identify patients with disability. Implementing these questions represents an opportunity to test new ways of capturing disability information suited to mainstream service provision contexts. It will be essential to evaluate the quality of the data produced during the initial period of implementation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: The collection of self-report patient disability information within general practice, using standard and conceptually-sound questions, has the potential to support improved provision of health care to patients with disability.

A call to action for more disability-inclusive health policy and systems research.

To date, the exclusion of people with disability participating in research has limited the evidence base informing health system strengthening policy and practice more generally, and addressing disability-related inequalities in access to health services and better health outcomes more particularly. Given that more than 1 billion people, or 16% of the world's population, have a disability, we may fail to respond to the needs of a large proportion of the population unless we are purposeful with inclusion. Our research in this area indicates that online qualitative methods can be effective in engaging under-represented groups and are essential to ensure their input into health policy and systems research. This has important implications for researchers whose responsibility it is to make all health research disability inclusive, for ethical and methodological reasons, so they do not perpetuate the under-representation of people with disability in health policy and systems research. Our paper puts forward several recommendations to facilitate more people with disability participating in health policy and systems research. By critically reflecting on a health system strengthening research project, in which we purposefully aimed to support the participation of people with disability, we identify lessons learnt and issues to consider when planning and conducting accessible research. We also propose a set of actions for moving the agenda forward.

Social interventions to support people with disability: A systematic review of economic evaluation studies.

Social interventions are essential in supporting the health and well-being of people with disability, but there is a critical need to prioritise resources for those that provide the best value for money. Economic evaluation is a widely used tool to assist priority setting when resources are scarce. However, the scope and consistency of economic evaluation evidence for disability social services are unclear, making it hard to compare across interventions to guide funding decisions. This systematic review aims to summarise the current evidence in the economic evaluation of social services for people with disability and to critically compare the methodologies used in conducting the economic evaluations with a focus on the outcomes and costs. We searched seven databases for relevant studies published from January 2005 to October 2021. Data were extracted on study characteristics such as costs, outcomes, perspectives, time horizons and intervention types. Overall, economic evaluation evidence of social services for people with disability was scarce. Twenty-four economic evaluations were included, with the majority conducting a cost-effectiveness analysis (n = 16). Most interventions focused on employment (n = 10), followed by community support and independent living (n = 6). Around 40% of the studies addressed people with mental illnesses (n = 10). The evidence was mixed on whether the interventions were cost-effective but the methods used were highly variable, which made comparisons across studies very difficult. More economic evidence on the value of interventions is needed as well as a more standardised and transparent approach for future research.

The wellbeing of women and men with and without disabilities: evidence from cross-sectional national surveys in 27 low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about disability-related inequities in personal wellbeing (PWB) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHOD: Secondary analysis of data collected in Round 6 of UNICEF's Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) undertaken in 27 LMICs (n = 296,693 women, 66,557 men). Data were aggregated across countries by mixed effects multi-level modelling and meta-analysis. RESULTS: Women and men with disabilities were less likely than their non-disabled peers to report being happy and to be satisfied with their life. These differences were evident in all countries for women and in 18 of 22 countries for men. Aggregated data indicated that: (1) women with disabilities were 14-15% less likely to be happy and 17% less likely to be satisfied with their lives; (2) men with disabilities were 15-17% less likely to be happy and 17-19% less likely to be satisfied with their lives; (3) disability-related inequalities in personal wellbeing were reduced by 22-26% for women and 11-22% for men by adjusting for differences in living conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Future releases of MICS data could prove a valuable resource in monitoring country-level progress to realising Sustainable Development Goal 3 and the extent to which progress is equitable between women and men and between people with/without disabilities. Results also suggest that a significant proportion of the disability-related inequities in wellbeing may be accounted for by modifiable differences in their living conditions and life experiences.

Exposure of Women With and Without Disabilities to Violence and Discrimination: Evidence from Cross-sectional National Surveys in 29 Middle- and Low-Income Countries.

There is a paucity of robust nationally representative data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) on the prevalence and risk factors associated with exposure of women with/without disability to either discrimination or violence. We undertook secondary analysis of data collected in Round 6 of UNICEF's Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) involving nationally representative data from 29 countries with a total sample size of 320,426 women aged 18 to 49 years. We estimated: (1) prevalence rates for exposure to discrimination and violence among women with/without disabilities in the previous year in a range of LMICs; (2) the relative risk of exposure when adjusted for demographic and contextual characteristics; (3) the relative risk of exposure associated with specific functional difficulties associated with disabilities; and (4) the association between country-level estimates and national wealth and human development potential. Our results indicated that women with disabilities were approximately twice as likely as women without disabilities to be exposed to violence and discrimination in the past year, and approximately one-third more likely to feel unsafe in either their home or local neighbourhood and to be at greater risk of domestic violence. Risk of exposure was associated with national characteristics (national wealth, human development potential) and within country factors, especially relative household wealth and level of education. These results must be of concern on two counts. First, they attest to the ongoing violation of the human rights of women with disabilities. Second, they point to increased exposure among women with disabilities to several well-documented social determinants of poorer health.

The association between household wealth and the prevalence of child disability and specific functional limitations: Analysis of nationally representative cross-sectional surveys in 40 low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: It is commonly stated that people with disabilities are at significantly greater risk of living in poverty than their non-disabled peers. However, most evidence supporting this assertion is drawn from studies in high-income countries and studies of adults. There is relatively little robust evidence on the association between poverty/wealth and the prevalence of child disability in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: To estimate the strength of association between an indicator of wealth (household assets) and the prevalence of disability among children in a range of LMICs. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data collected in Round 6 of UNICEF's Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. Nationally representative data were available for 40 countries with a total sample size of 473,578 children aged 2-17. Disability was ascertained by responses to the Washington Group for Disability Statistics module on functional limitations. RESULTS: There were significant dose-dependent relationships between household wealth quintile and the prevalence of disability and 13 of the 15 specific functional difficulties associated with disability. Children living in the poorest 20% of households were 35% more likely to have a disability than children living in the most affluent 20% of households. The strength of the association between household wealth and the prevalence of child disability was markedly lower in low-income countries than in middle-income countries. r CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide robust evidence that in LMICs the prevalence of child disability is disproportionately concentrated in poorer households. Further research is required to better understand why this association appears to be weaker in low-income countries. c.

Do Area-Level Environmental Factors Influence Employment for People with Disability? A Scoping Review.

Employment is an important social determinant of health and wellbeing. People with disability experience labour market disadvantage and have low labour force participation rates, high unemployment rates, and poor work conditions. Environmental factors are crucial as facilitators of or barriers to participation for people with disability. Understanding how the physical, social, and economic characteristics of local areas influence employment for people with disability can potentially inform interventions to reduce employment inequalities. We conducted a scoping review of research investigating associations between area-level environmental factors and employment for people with disability. Eighteen articles published between 2000 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria, and data were extracted to map the current evidence. Area-level factors were categorised into six domains relating to different aspects of environmental context: socioeconomic environment, services, physical environment, social environment, governance, and urbanicity. The urbanicity and socioeconomic environment domains were the most frequently represented (15 and 8 studies, respectively). The studies were heterogeneous in terms of methods and data sources, scale and type of geographic units used for analysis, disability study population, and examined employment outcomes. We conclude that the current evidence base is insufficient to inform the design of interventions. Priorities for future research are identified, which include further theorising the mechanisms by which area-level factors may influence employment outcomes, quantifying the contribution of specific factors, and interrogating specific factors underlying the association between urbanicity and employment outcomes for people with disability.

The prevalence of disability among Roma and non-Roma children in four West Balkan countries.

BACKGROUND: Very little is known about the prevalence of disability among Roma children. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of disability and significant cognitive delay among Roma and non-Roma children aged from 2 to 17 years in four West Balkan countries. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data collected in Round 6 of UNICEF's Multiple Indicators Cluster Surveys. Nationally representative samples of 6290 Roma and 13,005 non-Roma children in Kosovo, Montenegro, the Republic of North Macedonia, and Serbia. RESULTS: Roma children were twice as likely to have a disability, a less severe disability, multiple disabilities, and severe cognitive delay than their peers and were more likely to have functional limitations in all but one of the domains investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Disability is significantly more prevalent among Roma children aged 2-17 years than among their non-Roma peers in four Western Balkan countries. Future research should focus on the extent to which differences in disability may be attributable to differential rates of exposure to a range of social determinants.

The impact of the COVID pandemic on working age adults with disability: Meta-analysis of evidence from four national surveys.

Concern has been expressed about the extent to which people with disabilities may be particularly vulnerable to negative impacts of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. However, to date little published research has attempted to characterise or quantify the risks faced by people with/without disabilities in relation to COVID-19. We sought to compare the impact of the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated government responses among working age adults with and without disabilities in the UK on; COVID-19 outcomes, health and wellbeing, employment and financial security, health behaviours, and conflict and trust. We undertook secondary analysis of data collected in four UK longitudinal surveys; the Millennium Cohort Study, Next Steps, the British Cohort Study and the National Child Development Study. Combining analyses across surveys with random effects meta-analysis, there was evidence that people with disabilities were significantly more likely to report having had COVID-19 and had significantly increased levels of stress, less exercise, poorer sleep patterns, more conflict with their partner and others in their local area, and to have less trust in the government. While most outcomes did not differ significantly between participants with and without disability, the findings suggest that in the early days of COVID-19 a detrimental impact emerges for those with disabilities which is more pronounced among older people with disabilities. Future research is needed to determine the longer-term impact of the pandemic.

Child protection involvement of children of mothers with intellectual disability.

BACKGROUND: Children born to parents with intellectual disability (ID) have been shown as disproportionally represented in child protection services however with limited population-based research. OBJECTIVES: To investigate child protection involvement for children born to mothers with ID in Western Australia using linked administrative data. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: A cohort of 1106 children born to a mother with ID and a comparison group of 9796 children of mothers without ID were identified in Western Australia. METHODS: Cox regression analyses stratified by maternal Aboriginal status were conducted to investigate risk of child involvement with child protection services and care placement. Interaction with child age, intellectual disability status, and maternal mental health and substance use was investigated. RESULTS: Children born to a mother with ID were both at higher risk of having contact with child protection services (HR: 4.35 (3.70-5.12)) and placement in out-of-home care (HR: 6.21 (4.73-8.17)). For non-Aboriginal children, the risks of child protection involvement and placement for those born to mothers with ID were 7 times and 12 times higher than those of mothers without ID. The risk was lower for Aboriginal children, at 1.8 and 1.9 times, respectively. Infants born to mothers with ID were at higher risk of child protection involvement compared to other age groups. Maternal mental health and substance use moderated the increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: Intellectual disability alone is not sufficient justification for removal of children from their parents. The challenge for family services is ensuring that resources are adequate to meet the family's needs.

Health and healthcare for people with disabilities in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: While emerging evidence shows increased mortality from COVID-19 among people with disability, evidence regarding whether there are disability-related inequalities in health during the pandemic is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study compares access to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 related health care and mental health of people with and without disability. METHODS: Longitudinal analysis of 12,703 adults (16-64 years) who participated in W9 (2017-2019) and the April and/or May COVID-19 special surveys of the UK Understanding Society study. Descriptive analyses and Poisson regression (adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity and financial stress) were conducted to estimate associations between disability (measured at Wave 9) and a number of different COVID-19-related health and health care outcomes (COVID-19 symptoms, testing and hospitalisation), mental health and loneliness, and non-COVID-19 related health care (e.g. outpatient and inpatient hospital care, prescription medications). RESULTS: Results from the fully-adjusted regression models found that people with disability were more likely: to be hospitalised if symptomatic (adjusted PRR 3.0 95% 1.07-8.43); to experience current symptoms of psychological distress (PRR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.26) and to report being lonely (PRR 1.75, 95% CI 1.46-2.09) compared to non-disabled people. People with disability reported much higher levels of comorbidities than people without disability. However, inability to access health care and treatment were similar. CONCLUSIONS: As the UK opens up, it is important that health care services and social policy address the poor mental health and social isolation of people with disability so that the inequalities occurring early in the pandemic do not become further entrenched.