Internationally, stresses related to the COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected the mental health of family caregivers of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDDs).

This cross-sectional study investigated demographic, situational and psychological variables associated with mental wellbeing among family caregivers of adults with IDDs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Baseline data from 202 family caregivers participating in virtual courses to support caregiver mental well-being were collected from October 2020 to June 2022 via online survey. Mental well-being was assessed using total scores from the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale. Demographic, situational and psychological contributors to mental well-being were identified using hierarchical regression analysis.

Variables associated with lower levels of mental well-being were gender (women); age (<60 years old); lack of vaccine availability; loss of programming for their family member; social isolation; and low confidence in their ability to prepare for healthcare, support their family member's mental health, manage burnout and navigate healthcare and social systems. Connection with other families, confidence in managing burnout and building resilience and confidence in working effectively across health and social systems were significant predictors of mental well-being in the final regression model, which predicted 55.6% of variance in mental well-being (P < 0.001).

Family caregivers need ways to foster social connections with other families, and support to properly utilise healthcare and social services during public health emergencies. Helping them attend to their needs as caregivers can promote their mental health and ultimately improve outcomes for their family members with disabilities.

A significant number of people with autism require in-patient psychiatric care. Although the requirement to adequately meet the needs of people with autism in these settings is enshrined in UK law and supported by national guidelines, little information is available on current practice.

To describe characteristics of UK in-patient psychiatric settings admitting people with autism. Also to examine psychiatric units for their suitability, and the resultant impact on admission length and restrictive interventions.

Multiple-choice questions about in-patient settings and their ability to meet the needs of people with autism and the impact on their outcomes were developed as a cross-sectional study co-designed with a national autism charity. The survey was distributed nationally, using an exponential and non-discriminatory snowballing technique, to in-patient unit clinicians to provide a current practice snapshot.

Eighty responses were analysed after excluding duplications, from across the UK. Significant variation between units across all enquired parameters exist. Lack of autism-related training and skills across staff groups was identified, this becoming disproportionate when comparing intellectual disability units with general mental health units particularly regarding psychiatrists working in these units (psychiatrists: 94% specialist skills in intellectual disability units versus 6% specialist skills in general mental health units). In total, 28% of survey respondents felt people with autism are more likely to be subject to seclusion and 40% believed in-patients with autism are likely to end in segregation.

There is no systematic approach to supporting people with autism who are admitted to in-patient psychiatric units. Significant concerns are highlighted of lack of professional training and skill sets resulting in variable clinical practice and care delivery underpinned by policy deficiency. This could account for the reported in-patient outcomes of longer stay and segregation experienced by people with autism.

The approach taken to support individuals during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic needs to take into account the requirements of people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism, who represent a major vulnerable group, with higher rates of co-occurring health conditions and a greater risk of dying prematurely. To date, little evidence on COVID-related concerns have been produced and no report has provided structured feedback from the point of view of people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism or of their family/carers.

To provide systemised evidence-based information of the priority concerns for people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism regarding the COVID-19 pandemic.

Senior representatives of major UK-based professional and service-user representative organisations with a stake in the care of people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism were contacted to provide a list of concerns across three domains: ‘mental health and challenging behaviour’, ‘physical health and epilepsy’ and ‘social circumstances and support’. The feedback was developed into statements on frequently reported priorities. These statements were then rated independently by expert clinicians. A video-conference meeting to reconcile outliers and to generate a consensus statement list was held.

Thirty-two organisations were contacted, of which 26 (81%) replied. From the respondent's data, 30 draft consensus statements were generated. Following expert clinician review, there was initially strong consensus for seven statements (23%), increasing to 27 statements (90%) following video conferencing.

These recommendations highlight the expectations of people with intellectual disabilities and/or autism in the current pandemic. This could support policymakers and professionals’ deliver and evidence person-centred care.

There is a lack of good-quality instruments measuring stigma experienced by family members of stigmatised people.

To develop a self-report measure of stigma among families of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and examine associations between family stigma and other variables.

The new Family Stigma Instrument (FAMSI) was tested with 407 family carers, 53% of whose offspring had an autism spectrum disorder in addition to intellectual disability. They also completed measures of subjective well-being, caregiver burden, self-esteem and social support.

The FAMSI yielded a five-factor structure and had good reliability. Perceived family stigma, caregiver burden and subjective well-being were the strongest predictors of family stigma.

This instrument can advance our understanding of the impact of stigma on family members. It can also help us understand sociodemographic, psychosocial and contextual variables of both the carer and cared for person that may influence family members' experiences.

None.

To assess whether a Smarter Lunchroom intervention based on behavioural economics and adapted for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities would increase the selection and consumption of fruits, vegetables and whole grains, and reduce the selection and consumption of refined grains.

The 3-month intervention took place at a residential school between March and June 2012. The evaluation employed a quasi-experimental, pre–post design comparing five matched days of dietary data. Selection and plate waste of foods at lunch were assessed using digital photography. Consumption was estimated from plate waste.

Massachusetts, USA.

Students (n 43) aged 11–22 years with intellectual and developmental disabilities attending a residential school.

Daily selection of whole grains increased by a mean of 0·44 servings (baseline 1·62 servings, P = 0·005) and refined grains decreased by a mean of 0·33 servings (baseline 0·82 servings, P = 0·005). The daily consumption of fruits increased by a mean of 0·18 servings (baseline 0·39 servings, P = 0·008), whole grains increased by 0·38 servings (baseline 1·44 servings, P = 0·008) and refined grains decreased by a mean of 0·31 servings (baseline 0·68 servings, P = 0·004). Total kilojoules and total gram weight of food selected and consumed were unchanged. Fruit (P = 0·04) and vegetable (P = 0·03) plate waste decreased.

A Smarter Lunchroom intervention significantly increased whole grain selection and consumption, reduced refined grain selection and consumption, increased fruit consumption, and reduced fruit and vegetable plate waste. Nudge approaches may be effective for improving the food selection and consumption habits of adolescents and young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.