4.3 Article

High prevalence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension and obesity among persons with a recorded diagnosis of intellectual disability or autism spectrum disorder

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY RESEARCH
Volume 62, Issue 4, Pages 269-280

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jir.12462

Keywords

autism spectrum disorder; diabetes mellitus; down syndrome; hypertension; intellectual disability; prevalence studies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundObesity and lack of physical activity are frequently reported in persons with intellectual disability (ID) or autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We hypothesised a higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension in this population. MethodWe used administrative data for all primary and specialist outpatient and inpatient healthcare consultations for people with at least one recorded diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, hypertension or obesity from 1998 to 2015. Data were drawn from the central administrative database for Stockholm County, Sweden. It was not possible to separate data for type 1 and type 2 diabetes. We stratified 26988 individuals with IDs or ASD into three groups, with Down syndrome treated separately, and compared these groups with 1996140 people from the general population. ResultsCompared with the general population, men and women with ID/ASD had 1.6-3.4-fold higher age-adjusted odds of having a registered diagnosis of obesity or diabetes mellitus, with the exception of diabetes among men with Down syndrome. A registered diagnosis of hypertension was only more common among men with ID/ASD than in the general population. ConclusionsDiabetes and blood pressure health screening, along with efforts to prevent development of obesity already in childhood, are necessary for individuals with IDs and ASD. We believe that there is a need for adapted community-based health promotion programmes to ensure more equitable health for these populations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available