Habilitation Service Utilization Patterns Among Children With Mild Intellectual Disability

Abstract

Background There is a need for more knowledge about the utilization of habilitation services outside school among children with mild intellectual disability (ID). Specific aims. The aim of this study was to describe the patterns of habilitation service utilization among children with mild ID living in Sweden. Method A quantitative cross‐sectional total population study was performed using data from service providers’ existing records. Findings The most common types of services utilized were those by physicians, counselors, and psychologists. Compared with children with mild ID who were in special classes, children with mild ID who were integrated into mainstream classes utilized significantly fewer types of services. Increasing age of the child was associated with a lower number of service types utilized. Children integrated into mainstream classes were significantly less likely to utilize habilitation services than children attending special classes. The likelihood of utilizing habilitation services decreased with age. Approximately two‐thirds of the children utilized habilitation services. Discussion It is urgent that integration/inclusion in one organizational system, that is, school, does not result in exclusion in another system, such as pediatric habilitation services, which also aim to promote active participation in society. Pediatric habilitation professionals, teachers, and health units at schools need to interact in a manner so that children with mild ID, independent of type of school setting, have access to disability‐related services outside school.

Early emotional and behavioural problems predict use of habilitation services among children: Findings from a longitudinal follow-up study

“…Additionally, the child's age was not associated with use of habilitation services. Thus, although the child's age has been related to habilitation service use in previous research, with younger children more likely to use these services compared to older children [18,20], the results from this study contradict these findings. Previous studies, however, have included children of a wider age range, i.e., 2-17 years and 6-16 years, than children included in the current study, i.e.…”

“…These data were collected through separate items from the Focusstudy and included: parental country of birth (Sweden or other), parental level of education (higher/lower level), child gender (boy/girl) and child age (three/four/five years of age). This decision was based on previous studies showing associations between such factors and both emotional and behavioural problems and use of habilitation services in young children [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26].…”

“…According to previous research, boys, younger children, and children of parents with lower educational levels are more likely to use habilitation services than girls, older children and children of parents with higher educational levels, respectively [18][19][20]. In addition, children of ethnic minority parents might underutilize these services due to parental cultural beliefs, stigma or language barriers [21,22].…”

The effects of inclusion on academic achievement, socioemotional development and wellbeing of children with special educational needs

“…There is an online table showing Characteristics (including relevant outcomes such as reading and math scores) of children who maintained or lost access to typical peers (i.e., inclusion throughout (the ages 9–18) and transition from inclusion to special class somewhere between the age of 9 and 18, exact time not reported). The numbers are 26 and 30, thus there are 55 who remained in special education classes not included in the table.McPhillips, 2007 Reason for exclusion Case study of different schools, no effect studyNikolic, 2019 Reason for exclusion Serbia is not a member of OECDNolan, 2020 Reason for exclusion Only schools are analysed, not studentsOcque Karen, 2017 Reason for exclusion compares integrated cotaught (ICT) classrooms and with no ICT classrooms (regular class rooms for students without special needs)Olsson, 2017/09 Reason for exclusion Wrong outcome: The utilisation of habilitation services outside schoolOlsson, 2020/02 Reason for exclusion Wrong outcome: The utilisation of habilitation services outside schoolPandey, 2018/01 Reason for exclusion India is not in the OECDPant, 2016/01 Reason for exclusion India is not in the OECDSalgado, 2001 Reason for exclusion No effects of inclusion for special needs students, comparison is students without disabilitiesSavitz, 2005/03 Reason for exclusion Outcome is not relevant to the present reviewSaylor, 2017/01 Reason for exclusion No students are in special/segregated placementSchulte, 2004/06 Reason for exclusion The purpose of this study was to use school results on a large‐scale, high‐stakes reading test across several years to illustrate the complexities and issues involved in reporting school‐based special education outcomes. Test scores from six elementary schools in one school district in North Carolina were used to examine three different ways of reporting school‐based reading outcomes for students in special education in terms of their ability to provide meaningful, valid information about a school's functioning with students in special education: (a) percentage of students in special education r...…”

Social service utilisation in relation to class setting - a longitudinal study among children with mild intellectual disability in Sweden

“…If social service provision outside school to children with mild ID in Sweden is related to their class setting, has only been investigated in smaller studies. Among 84 children with mild ID living in Sweden, those who were integrated into regular classes were found to be considerably less likely to utilise disability-related services, compared to those children who were placed in special classes (Olsson et al 2015(Olsson et al , 2017. The fact that integration of pupils with ID in Sweden is largely based on factors other than children´s functional ability (Swedish National Agency for Education 2002; Swedish Schools Inspectorate 2016) indicates that adaptive functioning is not automatically higher among children integrated into regular classes, compared to children in special classes.…”