Diagnosis and pharmacological management of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults with and without intellectual disability: cohort study using electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is increasingly diagnosed in adults. People with intellectual disability have higher rates of ADHD yet there is little evidence on the presentation and pharmacological treatment of ADHD in this population or how this differs from the general population. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using data from electronic health records. Adults with intellectual disability newly diagnosed with ADHD between 2007 and 2022 were matched to adults with ADHD without intellectual disability and their clinical features and treatments were compared. RESULTS: A total of 159 adults with ADHD and intellectual disability and 648 adults with ADHD without intellectual disability formed the dataset. Adults with intellectual disability had higher rates of psychiatric co-morbidity and spent more time under mental health services than those without intellectual disability. They were more likely to have recorded agitation, aggression, hostility, and mood instability, and less likely to have poor concentration recorded in the 12 months prior to the diagnosis of ADHD. Following diagnosis, people with intellectual disability were significantly less likely to be prescribed any medication for ADHD than controls without intellectual disability (adjusted odds ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.38-0.91), and were less likely to be prescribed stimulants (27.7% v 46.0%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of behaviors that challenge in adults with intellectual disability may indicate co-occurring ADHD. Further work to define the safety and efficacy of medication for ADHD in adults with intellectual disability is needed to understand differences in prescription rates and to avoid inequities in care outcomes.

Constipation prevalence and risk from prescribed medications in people with intellectual disability: Findings from an English mortality programme.

Constipation is common in people with intellectual disability, with case reports of associated deaths. Risk factors include lifestyle factors, health conditions, and certain medications. We aimed to explore constipation in a sample of people with intellectual disability who died in 2021. We described prevalence of constipation, causes of death and the risk of secondary constipation from prescribed medications. Medications were scored based on the risk of constipation indicated in the drug profile. Forty-eight percent of the sample had constipation. Half of the sample were prescribed at least two medications that are commonly associated with side effects of constipation. There were high rates of antipsychotic (30%) and laxative (40%) drug prescription. Five people with a history of constipation died of causes of death associated with constipation. Our findings highlight the risk of secondary constipation due to prescribed medication and the seriousness of the condition in people with intellectual disability.

Recording of intellectual disability in general hospitals in England 2006-2019: Cohort study using linked datasets.

BACKGROUND: Accurate recognition and recording of intellectual disability in those who are admitted to general hospitals is necessary for making reasonable adjustments, ensuring equitable access, and monitoring quality of care. In this study, we determined the rate of recording of intellectual disability in those with the condition who were admitted to hospital and factors associated with the condition being unrecorded. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Retrospective cohort study using 2 linked datasets of routinely collected clinical data in England. We identified adults with diagnosed intellectual disability in a large secondary mental healthcare database and used general hospital records to investigate recording of intellectual disability when people were admitted to general hospitals between 2006 and 2019. Trends over time and factors associated with intellectual disability being unrecorded were investigated. We obtained data on 2,477 adults with intellectual disability who were admitted to a general hospital in England at least once during the study period (total number of admissions = 27,314; median number of admissions = 5). People with intellectual disability were accurately recorded as having the condition during 2.9% (95% CI 2.7% to 3.1%) of their admissions. Broadening the criteria to include a nonspecific code of learning difficulty increased recording to 27.7% (95% CI 27.2% to 28.3%) of all admissions. In analyses adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic deprivation, having a mild intellectual disability and being married were associated with increased odds of the intellectual disability being unrecorded in hospital records. We had no measure of quality of hospital care received and could not relate this to the presence or absence of a record of intellectual disability in the patient record. CONCLUSIONS: Recognition and recording of intellectual disability in adults admitted to English general hospitals needs to be improved. Staff awareness training, screening at the point of admission, and data sharing between health and social care services could improve care for people with intellectual disability.

A structured programme to withdraw antipsychotics among adults with intellectual disabilities: The Cornwall experience.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic medications are used among 19%-58% of adults with intellectual disabilities to manage challenging behaviour against the NICE guideline recommendations. Studies show that it is possible to completely withdraw antipsychotics in about one third of adults with intellectual disabilities and a dose reduction of 50% or more in another third. METHOD: In Cornwall, over three years the present authors developed a structured pathway to withdraw antipsychotics among adults with intellectual disabilities which involved people with intellectual disabilities and their carers, GPs, community learning disability team members and pharmacists. RESULTS: The present authors managed to withdraw antipsychotics totally among 46.5% (33/71) and reduced over 50% of dosage in another 11.3% (8/71) of adults with intellectual disabilities. At three months follow-up no one required hospital admission or change in placement. CONCLUSION: It is possible to withdraw/reduce antipsychotics in a high proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities if a concerted effort is made involving all stakeholders from the outset.

Impact of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine on survival in adults with Down syndrome and dementia: clinical cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence to guide pharmacological treatment in adults with Down syndrome and Alzheimer's disease. Aims To investigate the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine on survival and function in adults with Down syndrome and Alzheimer's disease. METHOD: This was a naturalistic longitudinal follow-up of a clinical cohort of 310 people with Down syndrome diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease collected from specialist community services in England. RESULTS: Median survival time (5.59 years, 95% CI 4.67-6.67) for those on medication (n = 145, mainly cholinesterase inhibitors) was significantly greater than for those not prescribed medication (n = 165) (3.45 years, 95% CI 2.91-4.13, log-rank test P<0.001). Sequential assessments demonstrated an early effect in maintaining cognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: Cholinesterase inhibitors appear to offer benefit for people with Down syndrome and Alzheimer's disease that is comparable with sporadic Alzheimer's disease; a trial to test the effect of earlier treatment (prodromal Alzheimer's disease) in Down syndrome may be indicated. Declaration of interest A.S. has undertaken consulting for Ono Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Z.W. has received a consultancy fee and grant from GE Healthcare, outside the submitted work.

Dementia diagnostic criteria in Down syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Dementia is a common clinical presentation among older adults with Down syndrome. The presentation of dementia in Down syndrome differs compared with typical Alzheimer's disease. The performance of manualised dementia criteria in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV-Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) is uncertain in this population.We aimed to determine the concurrent validity and reliability of clinicians' diagnoses of dementia against ICD-10 and DSM-IV-TR diagnoses. Validity of clinical diagnoses were also explored by establishing the stability of diagnoses over time. METHODS: We used clinical data from memory assessments of 85 people with Down syndrome, of whom 64 (75.3%) had a diagnosis of dementia. The cases of dementia were presented to expert raters who rated the case as dementia or no dementia using ICD-10 and DSM-IV-TR criteria and their own clinical judgement. RESULTS: We found that clinician's judgement corresponded best with clinically diagnosed cases of dementia, identifying 84.4% cases of clinically diagnosed dementia at the time of diagnosis. ICD-10 criteria identified 70.3% cases, and DSM-IV-TR criteria identified 56.3% cases at the time of clinically diagnosed dementia. Over time, the proportion of cases meeting ICD-10 or DSM-IV-TR diagnoses increased, suggesting that experienced clinicians used their clinical knowledge of dementia presentation in Down syndrome to diagnose the disorder at an earlier stage than would have been possible had they relied on the classic description contained in the diagnostic systems. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical diagnosis of dementia in Down syndrome is valid and reliable and can be used as the standard against which new criteria such as the DSM-5 are measured.

Variation in thromboxane B2 concentrations in serum and plasma in patients taking regular aspirin before and after clopidogrel therapy.

Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 antagonist is widely prescribed for the prevention of thrombotic events in patients with an acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It is recognised that there is inter-individual variation in the antiplatelet effects of both drugs. Recent data also suggest that P2Y12 antagonists can affect the response to aspirin. A direct indicator of the effect of aspirin on platelets is their ability to generate thromboxane, which if measured as the difference between the level of thromboxane B2 in serum and plasma ([TxB2]S-P) avoids the confounding effect of endogenous TxB2 production from other cells. We therefore analysed [TxB2]S-P as a measure of aspirin response in a group of 123 patients undergoing elective PCI before and after the introduction of clopidogrel. In a subgroup of 40 patients taking aspirin alone, we compared [TxB2]S-P and VerifyNow Aspirin for the assessment of aspirin response. There was a wide variation in plasma and serum TxB2 concentrations both before and after clopidogrel therapy but only 3.5% of patients had residual serum concentration of TxB2 > 10 ng/ml. There was a strong correlation between the pre and post clopidogrel levels of TxB2 (r ≥ 0.78; p = 0.001) and no significant difference in [TxB2]S-P. There was no correlation between the magnitude of response to clopidogrel response and the generation of thromboxane B2. Correlation between [TxB2]S-P and VerifyNow Aspirin was poor. We conclude that the use of a P2Y12 antagonist does not influence the effect of aspirin on the ability of platelets to generate thromboxane. Therefore, measurement of TxB2 levels in serum, after subtracting the contribution from plasma, provides a measure of the response to aspirin in patients taking dual antiplatelet therapy.

A UK-wide survey of community forensic services for adults with intellectual disability and/or autism.

BACKGROUND: Specialist forensic community teams for people with intellectual disability and/or autism have been developed, but little is known about their extent and delivery. AIMS: To describe specialist forensic community teams for people with intellectual disability and/or autism across the UK. METHOD: An online survey was sent to representatives of each UK Trust/Health Board providing adult mental health and/or intellectual disability services. Questions covered the availability, structure and activities of specialist community forensic services. Quantitative data were summarised and associations between access to specialist forensic teams and care were tested with Chi-squared tests. Thematic analysis of free-text survey responses was used to understand the challenges of providing community forensic mental health services for this group. RESULTS: A total of 49 out of 78 (63%) eligible Trusts/Health Boards responded, of which 25 (51%) had access to a specialist forensic community team. Teams operated either as part of a single Trust/Board (n = 13) or over a larger regional footprint (n = 12). The availability of specialist forensic community teams was associated with better access to offence-related interventions (χ2 = 15.1002, P < 0.005) and co-production of patient care plans (χ2 = 7.8726, P = 0.005). Respondents reported a wide variation in availability, expertise and perceived quality of community services. The availability of secure and generic in-patient beds, commissioning and legal barriers were also significant challenges in providing appropriate care. CONCLUSIONS: Coverage of specialist community forensic teams is not universal. There are indications that such teams are associated with improved care processes, but further work is needed to establish longer-term outcomes and the optimal model of care.

Specialist intellectual disability liaison nurses in general hospitals in England: cohort study using a large mortality dataset.

OBJECTIVE: Intellectual disability liaison nurses in general hospitals could enhance access to high-quality, adapted healthcare and improve outcomes. We aimed to explore associations between the input of intellectual disability liaison nurses and the quality of care in people with intellectual disability who are admitted to hospital. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a national dataset of mortality reviews. SETTING: General hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: 4742 adults with intellectual disability who died in hospital between 2016 and 2021 and whose deaths were reviewed as part of the Learning from Lives and Deaths mortality review programme. OUTCOME MEASURES: We used logistic regression to compare the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of those who did, and did not, receive input from an intellectual disability liaison nurse. We explored associations between liaison nurse input, care processes and overall quality of care. RESULTS: One-third of people with intellectual disability who died in hospital in England between 2016 and 2021 had input from an intellectual disability liaison nurse. Intellectual disability liaison nurse input was not evenly distributed across England and was more common in those who died of cancer. Having an intellectual disability liaison nurse involved in an individual's care was associated with increased likelihood of reasonable adjustments being made to care (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.95, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.32) and of best practice being identified (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.60) but was not associated with a rating of overall quality of care received (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Intellectual disability liaison nurses see only a minority of people with intellectual disability who are admitted to hospital in England. Increasing the availability of intellectual disability liaison nurses could improve care for this disadvantaged group.

The relationship between clinical presentation and the nature of care in adults with intellectual disability and epilepsy - national comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A quarter of People with Intellectual Disabilities (PwID) have epilepsy compared with 1% of the general population. Epilepsy in PwID is a bellwether for premature mortality, multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This group depends on their care provider to give relevant information for management, especially epilepsy. There is no research on care status relationship and clinical characteristics of PwID and epilepsy. AIM: Explore and compare the clinical characteristics of PwID with epilepsy across different care settings. METHOD: A retrospective multicentre cohort study across England and Wales collected information on seizure characteristics, intellectual disability severity, neurodevelopmental/biological/psychiatric comorbidities, medication including psychotropics/anti-seizure medication, and care status. Clinical characteristics were compared across different care settings, and those aged over and younger than 40 years. RESULTS: Of 618 adult PwID across six centres (male:female = 61%:39%), 338 (55%) received professional care whereas 258 (42%) lived with family. Significant differences between the care groups existed in intellectual disability severity (P = 0.01), autism presence (P < 0.001), challenging behaviour (P < 0.001) and comorbid physical conditions (P = 0.008). The two groups did not vary in intellectual disability severity/genetic conditions/seizure type and frequency/psychiatric disorders. The professional care cohort experienced increased polypharmacy (P < 0.001) and antipsychotic/psychotropic use (P < 0.001/P = 0.008).The over-40s cohort had lower autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) comorbidity (P < 0.001/P = 0.007), increased psychiatric comorbidity and challenging behaviour (P < 0.05), physical multimorbidity (P < 0.001), polypharmacy (P < 0.001) and antipsychotic use (P < 0.001) but reduced numbers of seizures (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: PwID and epilepsy over 40 years in professional care have more complex clinical characteristics, increased polypharmacy and antipsychotic prescribing but fewer seizures.

Identifying individuals with intellectual disability who access mental health support and are at high risk for adverse clinical outcomes: cohort study.

BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability often experience aggressive challenging behaviour and mental health issues. It can be difficult to identify those who are at higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes when in clinical care. AIMS: To characterise potential subgroups in adults with intellectual disability referred to mental health services in those presenting with aggressive behaviour or common mental disorders (CMDs). METHOD: There were 836 adults (≥18 years) with intellectual disability and a record of aggressive challenging behaviour, and 205 patients with intellectual disability and CMDs, who were seen in specialist mental health services over a 5-year period. Cluster analysis was used to define patient characteristics associated with clinical outcome. RESULTS: Distinct patient groups with differentiated profiles were observed in people with intellectual disability displaying aggressive challenging behaviour, and in those presenting with CMDs. Characteristics of the aggressive behaviour group who experienced adverse outcomes included being <30 years old, being male, more mentions of aggression and agitation in their clinical record, a diagnosis of pervasive developmental disorder and prescription of psychotropic medication. Characteristics of the CMD cluster that experienced adverse clinical outcomes were being older, being a White male, having a mild intellectual disability and physical health concerns. CONCLUSIONS: People with intellectual disability who experience adverse clinical outcomes can be identified with a cluster analysis approach of common features, but differ by clinical presentation. This could be used not only to stratify this clinically heterogeneous population in terms of response to interventions, but also improve precision in the development of tailored interventions.

Aggressive challenging behavior in adults with intellectual disability: An electronic register-based cohort study of clinical outcome and service use.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive challenging behavior in people with intellectual disability is a frequent reason for referral to secondary care services and is associated with direct harm, social exclusion, and criminal sanctions. Understanding the factors underlying aggressive challenging behavior and predictors of adverse clinical outcome is important in providing services and developing effective interventions. METHODS: This was a retrospective total-population cohort study using electronic records linked with Hospital Episode Statistics data. Participants were adults with intellectual disability accessing secondary services at a large mental healthcare provider in London, United Kingdom, between 2014 and 2018. An adverse outcome was defined as at least one of the following: admission to a mental health hospital, Mental Health Act assessment, contact with a psychiatric crisis team or attendance at an emergency department. RESULTS: There were 1,515 patient episodes related to 1,225 individuals, of which 1,019 episodes were reported as displaying aggressive challenging behavior. Increased episode length, being younger, psychotropic medication use, pervasive developmental disorder (PDD), more mentions of mood instability, agitation, and irritability, more contact with mental health professionals, and more mentions of social and/or home care package in-episode were all associated with increased odds of medium-high levels of aggression. Risk factors for an adverse clinical outcome in those who exhibited aggression included increased episode length, personality disorder, common mental disorder (CMD), more mentions of agitation in-episode, and contact with mental health professionals. PDD predicted better outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Routinely collected data confirm aggressive challenging behavior as a common concern in adults with intellectual disability who are referred for specialist support and highlight factors likely to signal an adverse outcome. Treatment targets may include optimizing management of CMDs and agitation.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on psychotropic prescribing for adults with intellectual disability: an observational study in English specialist community services.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a disproportionate impact on people with intellectual disability (PwID). PwID are at higher risk of mental illness and receive psychotropic prescribing 'off licence' also, to manage distress behaviour. The lockdown and reduction of multidisciplinary face-to-face appointments had an impact on care delivery, the recourse possibly being psychotropic prescribing. It is imperative to comprehend the influence the pandemic had on psychotropic prescribing patterns to enable future planning. AIMS: The aim was to understand the impact of the pandemic by comparing psychotropic prescribing patterns during the England lockdown with the prescribing patterns before lockdown in specialist urban and rural psychiatric services for PwID. METHOD: Data was collected from Cornwall (rural) and London (urban) intellectual disability services in England as a service evaluation project to rationalise psychotropic prescribing. PwID in both services open across January 2020 to January 2021 were included. Baseline patient demographics including age, gender, ethnicity, intellectual disability level and neurodevelopmental and psychological comorbidities were collected. Baseline psychotropic prescribing and subsequent % change for each psychotropic group for the two services was compared using Pearson's chi-square and z-statistic (two tailed) with significance taken at P < 0.05. RESULTS: The two centres London (n = 113) and Cornwall (n = 97) were largely comparable but for baseline differences in terms of presence of severe mental illness (37 v. 86, P < 0.001), challenging behaviour (44 v. 57, P < 0.05) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (37 v. 3, P < 0.001). There was an overall increase in psychotropic prescribing during lockdown in urban as compared with rural settings (11% v. 2%). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic caused an increase in psychotropic prescribing associated with lockdown severity and urban settings. Team structures could have played a role.

Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental healthcare and services: results of a UK survey of front-line staff working with people with intellectual disability and/or autism.

AIMS AND METHOD: Mental health services have changed the way they operate during the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated the challenges and innovations reported by staff working in services for people with intellectual disability and/or autism in National Health Service (NHS) and non-NHS sectors, and in in-patient and community settings. RESULTS: Data were drawn from 648 staff who participated in a UK-wide online survey. Issues around infection risk and mitigation were more important to those working in the NHS and in-patient settings. Community staff were more likely to express concern about the practicalities of a rapid shift to remote working and engaging patients remotely. Qualitative data revealed support for maintaining remote staff working and remote service provision post-pandemic. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Given the current emphasis on community support for people with intellectual disability and/or autism, the focus of research and clinical practice should be the development of accessible and effective models of remote service provision.

The reliability and validity of DSM 5 diagnostic criteria for neurocognitive disorder and relationship with plasma neurofilament light in a down syndrome population.

The validity of dementia diagnostic criteria depends on their ability to distinguish dementia symptoms from pre-existing cognitive impairments. The study aimed to assess inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity of DSM-5 criteria for neurocognitive disorder in Down syndrome. The utility of mild neurocognitive disorder as a distinct diagnostic category, and the association between clinical symptoms and neurodegenerative changes represented by the plasma biomarker neurofilament light were also examined. 165 adults with Down syndrome were included. Two clinicians independently applied clinical judgement, DSM-IV, ICD-10 and DSM-5 criteria for dementia (or neurocognitive disorder) to each case. Inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity were analysed using the kappa statistic. Plasma neurofilament light concentrations were measured for 55 participants as a marker of neurodegeneration and between group comparisons calculated. All diagnostic criteria showed good inter-rater reliability apart from mild neurocognitive disorder which was moderate (k = 0.494). DSM- 5 criteria had substantial concurrence with clinical judgement (k = 0.855). When compared to the no neurocognitive disorder group, average neurofilament light concentrations were higher in both the mild and major neurocognitive disorder groups. DSM-5 neurocognitive disorder criteria can be used reliably in a Down syndrome population and has higher concurrence with clinical judgement than the older DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria. Whilst the inter-rater reliability of the mild neurocognitive disorder criteria was modest, it does appear to identify people in an early stage of dementia with underlying neurodegenerative changes, represented by higher average NfL levels.

Risk factors for in-patient admission among adults with intellectual disability and autism: investigation of electronic clinical records.

Adults with intellectual disability or autism are at risk of psychiatric admission which carries personal, social and economic costs. We identified 654 adults with intellectual disability or autism in the electronic clinical records of one mental health trust. We investigated the demographic and clinical factors associated with admission and readmission after discharge. Young male patients with intellectual disability, schizophrenia and previous admissions are most at risk of the former, whereas affective and personality disorders predict the latter. Both community intellectual disability services and mental health crisis care must focus on providing effective support for those patients.

The association between loneliness and common mental disorders in adults with borderline intellectual impairment.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness is linked to a number of adverse health outcomes in the general population. There is a lack of evidence on the prevalence and impact of loneliness in people with borderline intellectual impairment. METHODS: Data from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, a national survey of England, was analysed using Weights-adjusted regression analyses to compare the prevalence of loneliness and the association between loneliness and socio-demographic and clinical variables in people with borderline intellectual impairment and the general population. RESULTS: Data from 6877 participants were included. Ten percent (n = 671) of the sample had borderline intellectual impairment and their prevalence of loneliness was 24.5% compared to 18.4% in the general population. This difference was explained by exposure to social disadvantages. Associations were found in both groups between loneliness and being single, unemployed, low income, lower social support, feeling unsafe and discrimination in the past year. Loneliness was associated with lower wellbeing and higher rates of common mental disorders, suicidal thoughts and chronic physical disorders in both groups. Intellectual functioning moderated the relationship between loneliness and income (OR 1.82; 95%CI 1.06 to 3.11) and suicidal thoughts in the last week (OR 0.13; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.93). LIMITATIONS: IQ was measured using the National Adult Reading Test (NART), which is only valid for English speakers and loneliness was measured using a single item. CONCLUSION: Loneliness is more prevalent in people with borderline intellectual impairment. Interventions targeting social disadvantages (e.g. low income) may lead reduce loneliness and vulnerability to mental health problems.

UK psychiatrists' experience of withdrawal of antipsychotics prescribed for challenging behaviours in adults with intellectual disabilities and/or autism.

BACKGROUND: A high proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities are prescribed off-licence antipsychotics in the absence of a psychiatric illness. The National Health Service in England launched an initiative in 2016, 'Stopping over-medication of people with a learning disability [intellectual disability], autism or both' (STOMP), to address this major public health concern. AIMS: To gain understanding from UK psychiatrists working with adults with intellectual disabilities on the successes and challenges of withdrawing antipsychotics for challenging behaviours. METHOD: An online questionnaire was sent to all UK psychiatrists working in the field of intellectual disability (estimated 225). RESULTS: Half of the 88 respondents stated that they started withdrawing antipsychotics over 5 years ago and 52.3% stated that they are less likely to initiate an antipsychotic since the launch of STOMP. However, since then, 46.6% are prescribing other classes of psychotropic medication instead of antipsychotics for challenging behaviours, most frequently the antidepressants. Complete antipsychotic discontinuation in over 50% of patients treated with antipsychotics was achieved by only 4.5% of respondents (n = 4); 11.4% reported deterioration in challenging behaviours in over 50% of patients on withdrawal and the same proportion (11.4%) reported no deterioration. Only 32% of respondents made the diagnosis of psychiatric illness in all their patients themselves. Family and paid carers' concern, lack of multi-agency and multidisciplinary input and unavailability of non-medical psychosocial intervention are key reported factors hampering the withdrawal attempt. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to develop national guidelines to provide a framework for systematic psychotropic drug reviews and withdrawal where possible.