Impact of the initial response to COVID‐19 on long‐term care for people with intellectual disability: an interrupted time series analysis of incident reports

Schuengel, Carlo; Tummers, Joep; Embregts, P.J.C.M.; Leusink, Geraline L

doi:10.1111/jir.12778

Cited by 51 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The left column describes the main categories in this group of articles. Subcategory Country and references Effects on spreading Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay [309] ; Australia [310] Bangladesh [311] ; China [31] , [32] , [33] , [312] , [313] , [314] , [315] ; China, Germany, India, Italy, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, UK, USA [316] ; Italy [317] , [318] ; New Zealand [319] ; Puerto Rico [320] ; South Korea [321] ; Taiwan [322] ; USA [323] , [324] , [325] , [326] , [327] , [328] ; 44 countries [329] ; 53 countries [330] ; 56 countries [331] ; 142 countries [332] ; 149 countries [333] Effects on behaviors China [334] ; China, Italy [335] ; Denmark, Sweden [336] ; Germany [337] USA [338] , [339] , [340] , [341] ; 20 countries [342] ; 67 countries [343] Effects on medical practice Italy [344] ; Netherlands [345] ; UK [346] …”

Section: Quantifying the Effects On Npismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infectious diseases and human behavior are intertwined. On one side, our movements and interactions are the engines of transmission. On the other, the unfolding of viruses might induce changes to our daily activities. While intuitive, our understanding of such feedback loop is still limited. Before COVID-19 the literature on the subject was mainly theoretical and largely missed validation. The main issue was the lack of empirical data capturing behavioral change induced by diseases. Things have dramatically changed in 2020. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been the key weapon against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and affected virtually any societal process. Travels bans, events cancellation, social distancing, curfews, and lockdowns have become unfortunately very familiar. The scale of the emergency, the ease of survey as well as crowdsourcing deployment guaranteed by the latest technology, several Data for Good programs developed by tech giants, major mobile phone providers, and other companies have allowed unprecedented access to data describing behavioral changes induced by the pandemic. Here, I review some of the vast literature written on the subject of NPIs during the COVID-19 pandemic. In doing so, I analyze 348 articles written by more than 2518 of authors in the first 12 months of the emergency. While the large majority of the sample was obtained by querying PubMed, it includes also a hand-curated list. Considering the focus, and methodology I have classified the sample into seven main categories: epidemic models, surveys, comments/perspectives, papers aiming to quantify the effects of NPIs, reviews, articles using data proxies to measure NPIs, and publicly available datasets describing NPIs. I summarize the methodology, data used, findings of the articles in each category and provide an outlook highlighting future challenges as well as opportunities.

show abstract

Section: Quantifying the Effects On Npismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, Ref. [345] studies the effect of NPIs in a long term care institution in the Netherlands specialized on intellectual disabilities. The authors focused on incidents reported during the emergency respect to historical data.…”

Section: Quantifying the Effects On Npismentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has only been limited research into the impact of COVID‐19 on social care staff and on behaviours that challenge. In terms of the latter, one study in the Netherlands found that, after an initial drop in reporting of incidents of aggression at the start of COVID‐19 restrictions, levels increased significantly (Schuengel et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of COVID‐19 restrictions in the United Kingdom on the positive behavioural support of people with an intellectual disability

Murray

McKenzie

Martin

et al. 2021

Brit J Learn Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accessible summary The way that people with an intellectual disability are supported is very important. The COVID‐19 virus has changed the way that staff help people with an intellectual disability. We wanted to know about those changes and whether learning about positive behavioural support (PBS) helped staff to cope with them. The main changes were that people with an intellectual disability could not go out or see family and friends as often. Staff came up with new things to do for the people they supported, and PBS learning seemed to help staff to cope. Abstract Background It has been suggested that COVID‐19 and the associated restrictions are likely to have a negative impact on the provision of positive behavioural support (PBS) to people with an intellectual disability. Methods Fifty‐eight staff, who had recently completed an accredited positive behavioural support (PBS) programme, responded to an online questionnaire, which asked them to rate the impact of COVID‐19 on factors related to PBS. Results Participants reported a neutral or somewhat positive impact on all the areas measured, with the exception of the activities and quality of life of those they supported, which were somewhat negatively affected. The participants rated the learning from their PBS programme as helping them cope with COVID‐19 to some extent. Examples of positive and negative effects and ways in which PBS helped staff to cope are presented. Conclusions Many staff developed creative solutions that allowed them to provide PBS despite the COVID‐19 restrictions. PBS learning appeared to help staff cope with the negative impact of the restrictions.

show abstract

“…In a study from the Netherlands, metadata on weekly incident and near-incident reports from 2016 to June 2020 involving over 14,000 clients with mild to serious intellectual disability in a long-term care organisation for people with intellectual disability were subjected to interrupted time series analysis, comparing the COVID-19 period with the pre-COVID-19 period [ 9 ]. The results showed that the measures taken against COVID-19 coincided with changes in weekly incident reports and drops in incident reports were observed immediately after these measures were announced and implemented, along with an unexpected drop in medication error reports, suggesting a lower rate of incident reporting.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of New Clinical Policies during the COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Incidents and Complaints at a UK Teaching Hospital

Atiomo

Weir

Kean

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To investigate any associations between new clinical policies implemented because of the COVID-19 pandemic and harm to patients. Methods: Retrospective data collection of incidents and complaints reported through Datix®, and the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS), respectively. The setting was the Family Health division in a University teaching hospital in the UK. Primary and secondary outcome measures included: the proportion of incidents reported on Datix® from 23 March 2020 to 29 May 2020, compared to the period from 23 March 2019 to 29 May 2019. COVID-19 related incidents and complaints and association with newly published guidelines or pathways from 23 March 2020 to 29 May 2020 were investigated. Results: There was no significant difference in the proportion of overall patient activity resulting in incidents reported on Datix in 2020 (2.08%) compared to 2019 (2.09%), with 98% resulting in no/low harm in 2020. Three incident categories had increases in relative proportions of incidents including the terms “COVID” or “Corona” compared to incidents that did not: “Child death”, “delay/failure to treatment and procedure” and “information governance”. One of the child deaths was a miscarriage and we were unable to link the second child death to a change in clinical policy at this stage. We were only able to link two COVID-19 associated incidents with a pathway or procedural change (one to the Children’s Emergency Department admission pathway and the second to the introduction of virtual antenatal clinics). Eighteen complaints related to COVID-19 were logged. However, at this stage, we are unable to link any of these to a published change in clinical policy. Conclusions: New policies introduced in the division, during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with similar rates of clinical incidents, when compared with the previous year. There were only two COVID-19-related incidents clearly related to a change in pathways and procedures. Continued surveillance and improved metrics for monitoring the impact of changes to pathways and procedures should be sought with the sustained presence of COVID-19 in clinical areas.

show abstract

Impact of the initial response to COVID‐19 on long‐term care for people with intellectual disability: an interrupted time series analysis of incident reports

Cited by 51 publications

References 18 publications

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review

The impact of COVID‐19 restrictions in the United Kingdom on the positive behavioural support of people with an intellectual disability

Impact of New Clinical Policies during the COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Incidents and Complaints at a UK Teaching Hospital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About