Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
The College of Family Physicians of Canada
  • Other Publications
    • http://www.cfpc.ca/Canadianfamilyphysician/
    • https://www.cfpc.ca/Login/
    • Careers and Locums
  • My alerts
The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Archive
    • Supplemental Issues
    • Collections - French
    • Collections - English
  • Info for
    • Authors & Reviewers
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Advertisers
    • Careers & Locums
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
  • About CFP
    • About CFP
    • About the CFPC
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Terms of Use
    • Contact Us
  • Feedback
    • Feedback
    • Rapid Responses
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • Email Alerts
  • Blogs
    • Latest Blogs
    • Blog Guidelines
    • Directives pour les blogues
  • Mainpro+ Credits
    • About Mainpro+
    • Member Login
    • Instructions
  • RSS feeds
  • Follow cfp Template on Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
Research ArticleResearch

Improving the quality of primary care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities

Value of the periodic health examination

Janet Durbin, Avra Selick, Ian Casson, Laurie Green, Andrea Perry, Megan Abou Chacra and Yona Lunsky
Canadian Family Physician April 2019; 65 (Suppl 1) S66-S72;
Janet Durbin
Research Scientist for the Provincial System Support Program of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, Ont, and Associate Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Toronto.
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Janet.Durbin@camh.ca
Avra Selick
Research Coordinator for the Provincial System Support Program of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.
MA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ian Casson
Associate Professor in the Department of Family Medicine at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ont.
MD MSc CCFP FCFP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laurie Green
Family physician practising at St Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, Ont, and Lecturer at the University of Toronto.
MD CCFP(EM)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrea Perry
Transitions Facilitator for the Developmental Disabilities Primary Care Program, Surrey Place in Toronto.
OT Reg (Ont) MHSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Megan Abou Chacra
Research assistant at Surrey Place.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yona Lunsky
Directs the Azrieli Adult Neurodevelopmental Centre at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and is Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Toronto.
PhD CPsych
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objective To implement a Health Check protocol for patients with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and assess outcomes.

Design Retrospective chart review and staff survey.

Setting Two Ontario family health teams.

Participants Of 276 patients with IDD identified, 139 received the Health Check (Health Check group). A convenience sample (N = 147) of clinical staff participated in the survey.

Main outcome measures The protocol included patient identification, invitation, and modified health examination. Chart review assessed completion of 8 preventive maneuvers, and clinical staff were surveyed on their comfort, knowledge, and skills in care of patients with IDD. Logistic regression analyses were used to compare outcomes for the Health Check and non–Health Check groups, adjusted for practice site.

Results Documentation of blood pressure, weight, body mass index, and influenza vaccination was significantly higher (P < .001) in the Health Check group, exceeding 70% of patients. Screening rates were higher for mammograms (63% vs 54%), fecal occult blood testing (39% vs 23%), and diabetes testing (80% vs 61%), but not significantly so, and they were similar to general population rates. Papanicolaou test rates were low for both groups (34% vs 32%). Staff comfort and skills were rated significantly higher (P < .05) for those who performed the Health Check. Still, fewer than half thought they had the necessary skills and resources to care for patients with IDD.

Conclusion Performing the Health Check was associated with improved preventive care and staff experience. Wider implementation and evaluation is needed, along with protocol adjustments to provide more support to staff for this work.

Adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) have a unique pattern of health challenges, including increased rates of physical disabilities, sensory impairments, obesity, psychiatric disorders, seizure disorders, and disorders of the respiratory, gastrointestinal, and endocrine systems.1–3 They also have high rates of emergency department visits and inpatient admissions, some of which are for ambulatory care–sensitive conditions.4–6 Owing to difficulties accessing care that meets their health needs,7,8 patients with IDD generally receive care that is reactive rather than proactive, with preventive care rates being particularly low.2,9

Although no longer recommended for the general population,10 comprehensive health reviews (or Health Checks) are an evidence-based strategy for improving preventive care in adults with IDD.11 They are associated with increased preventive care testing, detection of new health conditions, and better follow-up management,2,9 and they can enhance practitioner comfort and knowledge of IDD health needs.11,12 The Health Check is recommended in the “Primary care of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. 2018 Canadian consensus guidelines.”1

Policy initiatives to promote Health Checks for people with IDD have been introduced in a number of jurisdictions internationally.11 While the rate of delivery has increased, the effects on preventive screening and disease recognition vary.2,13 For the patients, factors such as poor health literacy and communication skills and dependence on carers might complicate examination participation and preventive screening uptake. Clinical staff might lack adequate time to conduct examinations, knowledge of the specific disease risks associated with IDD, and comfort interacting with the patients.12,14,15 In Ontario, a recent study using administrative health data found that, while most adults with IDD have primary care physicians, only 22% received a comprehensive examination over a 2-year period, and rates of preventive screening were lower than for the general population.16

Our team worked with 2 Ontario family health teams (FHTs)17 to implement a protocol for conducting the Health Check and evaluated the results. The implementation is described elsewhere.18 Here we report on outcomes. Specifically, we assessed the effects on preventive screening rates and on staff comfort and knowledge related to care of adult patients with IDD.

METHODS

Health Check implementation

Each FHT site identified patients with IDD through an electronic medical record (EMR) key word and diagnostic code search (IDD cohort). These patients were proactively invited for a Health Check, and staff were supported to conduct the examination with point-of-care tools and education about IDD in primary care.19 The implementation period was 22 months at FHT 1 (July 2013 to April 2015) and 15 months at FHT 2 (June 2014 to August 2015).

Outcome measures and sample

We employed a cross-sectional design using a chart audit and a staff survey to assess outcomes at the end of the implementation period for those who did and did not receive or deliver Health Checks.

Chart audit.

The audit assessed delivery of 8 preventive maneuvers recommended in the Canadian guidelines and for which data were available (Table 1).20–23 We calculated the portion of eligible patients who received each maneuver during a 2-year period. The IDD cohort constituted the audit sample.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Preventive maneuvers evaluated in the chart audit

Staff survey.

A questionnaire on staff views about care of patients with IDD was developed based on existing attitude measures24,25 and refined through 2 rounds of pilot-testing. The final survey asked about overall confidence in the quality of care provided to patients with IDD (1 item); skills, knowledge, and comfort in care of patients with IDD (5 items); and practice supports (2 items). Three additional items on the intervention fit, benefit, and feasibility were only completed by staff who had performed a Health Check. For each item, staff rated their agreement on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Surveys were anonymous and voluntarily completed by physicians and nurses at rounds and staff meetings following implementation (convenience sample).

Analysis

Logistic regression analyses were used to assess the effects of Health Check delivery. For preventive care outcomes, performance of each maneuver was the dependent variable and whether or not the patient received a Health Check was the predictor. For staff experience outcomes, the portion of respondents positively rating each survey item was the dependent variable and whether or not they had performed a Health Check was the predictor. To assess whether the relationship between Health Check delivery or receipt and outcomes persisted independent of site, we adjusted the models for practice site. Percentages, odds ratios, 95% CIs, and P values were reported to summarize and compare results between groups. With only 2 practice sites and relatively small sample sizes for some tests with limited eligibility, such as mammograms, we could not evaluate the influence of additional practice or provider factors on outcomes.

Ethics approval was obtained from the home institutions of the research team and the 2 primary care sites.

RESULTS

Preventive testing

Of the 276 patients with IDD identified at the 2 FHT sites, 139 (50%) attended a Health Check (Table 2). Most had blood pressure, weight, and body mass index (BMI) recorded; many had received a hemoglobin A1c test, influenza vaccine, and mammogram; and few had had Papanicolaou tests or fecal occult blood tests (FOBTs). Provision of general health tests (blood pressure, weight, BMI) and influenza vaccination was higher in the Health Check than the non–Health Check group, and these differences held in the adjusted models. For cancer and diabetes screening, rates did not differ between the 2 groups in either the unadjusted or adjusted models.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Association between attending Health Checks and preventive health maneuvers completed, adjusted by practice site

Staff feedback

Surveys were completed by 147 staff, of whom 98 (67%) had performed a Health Check (Table 3). Of those who performed the Health Check, most were familiar with the Canadian consensus guidelines for primary care of adults with IDD. Many felt able to adapt their approach and were comfortable caring for the patients. Fewer reported being aware of specific health comorbidities and community resources or having the necessary skills, training, and resources to make needed accommodations. Overall, half believed they could provide high-quality care to patients with IDD. Across all 8 items, ratings were significantly higher for staff who completed the Health Check compared with those who did not, and most differences remained significant in the adjusted analyses.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Staff feedback on Health Check delivery, adjusted by practice site

Those who completed Health Checks indicated that the intervention fit with the FHT mandate (94%) and benefited patients (87%), and two-thirds thought they were feasible to perform.

DISCUSSION

The Health Check has been shown to increase the quality of care for patients with IDD in other countries, and it is recommended in the Canadian consensus guidelines for primary care of adults with IDD.1,11 Implementation in the Canadian context is important to understand and is the contribution of this study. We worked with 2 Ontario primary care practices to implement a Health Check protocol, and assessed the effects on patient care and staff experience. Our findings showed some positive results but also some areas of challenge.

Regarding preventive care, documentation of blood pressure, weight, and BMI was significantly higher in the Health Check group, exceeding 80% of patients. The rate of diabetes screening, at 80%, was also high, although this was not significantly different from the non–Health Check group (61%). These screening tests are important given that both the risks and complications associated with diabetes and obesity are greater for individuals with IDD than comparable populations with no such disability.26,27

The completion rates for FOBTs (39%) and mammograms (63%) were higher for the Health Check group (although not significantly so), and they are comparable to Ontario general population rates of 29%28 and 65%,29 respectively. Both of these tests are completed outside of the office, and the FOBT is a difficult screening test to perform. Thus, while our sample was small, our results are encouraging. Learning more about how these tests were explained to patients, and their caregivers when present, would be valuable as would continued monitoring to see if these results are sustained.

Pap test completion rates were not significantly different between the groups (34% and 32% for Health Check and non–Health Check groups, respectively) and are much lower than for the Ontario general population (63% in 2012 to 2014).29 The Pap test is an invasive procedure that can create anxiety and discomfort in patients. It is mostly relevant for sexually active women. For patients with IDD, obtaining an accurate history to determine relevance might be challenging. Additionally, if a Pap test is appropriate, a discussion is needed to obtain consent or to arrange the conditions to facilitate assent.16,30 While the Health Check creates an opportunity to administer a Pap test, extra time might be needed to inquire about patient sexual activity and risk behaviour to determine need, explain the test using language adapted to the patient’s cognitive level, and obtain approval to proceed.8,16,30 Few staff in our study reported feeling equipped with necessary time and resources to make needed accommodations for the Health Check, and a Pap test might be one example of a preventive care maneuver that clinical staff believed they could not easily accommodate.

While point-of-care tools and education about Health Check delivery were available to all clinical staff, those who performed Health Checks reported more comfort and knowledge in the care of patients with IDD across most assessed areas. Although the staff who were willing to perform the Health Check might have already felt more knowledgeable and skilled, the value of direct contact to prepare staff to care for patients with IDD has been noted elsewhere.12,14,31 In our survey, most of those who performed the Health Check also thought that it benefited patients, so having direct contact might increase commitment to the intervention as well as enhance comfort and skills, and might be a key factor in the sustainable implementation of Health Checks.

Despite some positive results, staff indicated a need for more support, and there are a number of refinements to the Health Check protocol that might enhance practice capacity. If a standard approach to documenting the presence of IDD in patient charts is established, an EMR-based process can alert staff before Health Checks, and accommodations such as extra time and physically accessible clinic rooms can be planned. Nursing staff can help prepare both the patients and their caregivers for the examination, particularly the more invasive procedures, and can assist with some parts of the Health Check (eg, obtain health history).12 Clerical staff can help to make patients more comfortable and less anxious while in the waiting room.32 Physicians can use health assessment instruments that have been modified specifically for care of patients with IDD.19,33 The Ontario H-CARDD (Health Care Access Research and Developmental Disabilities) initiative has developed a tool kit of resources that are freely available online, and both study sites have embedded some tools in their EMRs. Follow-up could further assess the use and value of these tools.34

At the system level, incentive payments to account for the extra time that might be required to perform Health Checks have led to increased delivery in some jurisdictions. Registries of patients with IDD, also maintained in some jurisdictions, can be used to identify patients with IDD to invite to the Health Check and for other targeted prevention work.2,11

Limitations

The study has a number of limitations. Staff feedback was based on a convenience sample and might not be generally representative of staff views about the care of patients with IDD. Also, staff perceptions might not align with actual practice. Related to patient outcomes, the eligible sample for some tests was small, limiting what we could learn about rates of delivery and group differences. However, our results align with the work of others suggesting that Health Checks have benefit. Also, some health issues common among patients with IDD (eg, related to vision, hearing, thyroid disease, gastrointestinal function) were not consistently recorded in practice EMRs and could not be examined. We only assessed 2 practices, and wider evaluation of this effort in more varied practice settings is needed. Finally, the study focused on preventive screening outcomes but other effects should be explored, including earlier or more accurate recognition of disease, follow-up management, and team contributions to care.

Conclusion

A Health Check is a proactive strategy to comprehensively address the health needs of adults with IDD in primary care. In this study, in the context of Canadian family practice, the Health Check was associated with more preventive tests in some areas and higher levels of staff comfort with this patient group. Further studies can assess other effects and supports for practice staff to manage the patient visits so that the full value of the Health Check can be realized.

Acknowledgments

This study is part of the H-CARDD (Health Care Access Research and Developmental Disabilities) program (www.hcardd.ca). We gratefully acknowledge the province of Ontario for its support of this study through its research grants program. The opinions, results, and conclusions in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect those of the province. We also thank staff from the 2 sites participating in the implementation and evaluation of this project.

Notes

Editor’s key points

  • ▸ Canadian guidelines for the primary care of patients with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) recommend a comprehensive health review (Health Check), but implementation is challenging. This study assessed the effectiveness of a Health Check protocol in 2 family health teams.

  • ▸ Periodic health examinations can improve preventive screening rates and increase staff comfort and skill caring for patients with IDD, as was the case in this study. Inviting patients with IDD in for periodic health examinations can help to shift from reactive to proactive care.

  • ▸ Processes can be implemented to make examinations more feasible to conduct and more beneficial for patients with IDD.

Points de repère du rédacteur

  • ▸ Les lignes directrices consensuelles canadiennes en matière de soins primaires aux adultes ayant une déficience intellectuelle et développementale (DID) recommandent l’évaluation médicale périodique complète (examen médical), mais il peut être difficile de mettre cette recommandation en pratique. Cette étude a évalué l’efficacité du protocole d’examen médical auprès de deux équipes de santé familiale.

  • ▸ L’examen médical périodique peut améliorer le taux de dépistage préventif et accroître l’aisance et les compétences du personnel durant les soins aux patients ayant une DID, comme cela était le cas dans cette étude. Le fait d’inviter les patients ayant une DID à subir un examen médical périodique fait passer les soins de réactifs à proactifs.

  • ▸ Il est possible de mettre des protocoles en place pour faciliter la faisabilité des examens et les rendre plus bénéfiques aux patients ayant une DID.

Footnotes

  • Contributors

  • Dr Lunsky conceived the project. Drs Durbin and Lunsky designed the study and oversaw implementation and analyses. Dr Durbin led the writing of the manuscript. Ms Selick managed the implementation, performed the analyses, and contributed to the writing. Ms Abou Chacra assisted with preparing the survey and chart audit data. All authors discussed the results critically and assisted with and commented on the manuscript.

  • Competing interests

    None declared

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • Cet article a fait l’objet d’une révision par des pairs.

  • Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Sullivan WF,
    2. Diepstra H,
    3. Heng J,
    4. Ally S,
    5. Bradley E,
    6. Casson I,
    7. et al
    . Primary care of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. 2018 Canadian consensus guidelines. Can Fam Physician 2018;64:254-79. (Eng), e137–66 (Fr).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Buszewicz M,
    2. Welch C,
    3. Horsfall L,
    4. Nazareth I,
    5. Osborn D,
    6. Hassiotis A,
    7. et al
    . Assessment of an incentivised scheme to provide annual health checks in primary care for adults with intellectual disability: a longitudinal cohort study. Lancet Psychiatry 2014;1(7):522-30. Epub 2014 Dec 3.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    1. Ouellette-Kuntz H
    . Understanding health disparities and inequities faced by individuals with intellectual disabilities. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2005;18(2):113-21.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Balogh R,
    2. Brownell M,
    3. Ouellette-Kuntz H,
    4. Colantonio A
    . Hospitalisation rates for ambulatory care sensitive conditions for persons with and without an intellectual disability—a population perspective. J Intellect Disabil Res 2010;54(9):820-32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.
    1. Lunsky Y,
    2. Lin E,
    3. Balogh R,
    4. Klein-Geltink J,
    5. Wilton S,
    6. Kurdyak P
    . Emergency department visits and use of outpatient physician services by adults with developmental disability and psychiatric disorder. Can J Psychiatry 2012;57(10):601-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Carey IM,
    2. Hosking FJ,
    3. Harris T,
    4. DeWilde S,
    5. Beighton C,
    6. Shah SM,
    7. et al
    . Do health checks for adults with intellectual disability reduce emergency hospital admissions? Evaluation of a natural experiment. J Epidemiol Community Health 2017;71(1):52-8. Epub 2016 Jun 16.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Krahn GL,
    2. Fox MH
    . Health disparities of adults with intellectual disabilities: what do we know? What do we do? J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2014;27(5):431-46. Epub 2013 Jul 31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Alborz A,
    2. McNally R,
    3. Glendinning C
    . Access to health care for people with learning disabilities in the UK: mapping the issues and reviewing the evidence. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005;10(3):173-82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Lennox N,
    2. Bain C,
    3. Rey-Conde T,
    4. Purdie D,
    5. Bush R,
    6. Pandeya N
    . Effects of a comprehensive health assessment programme for Australian adults with intellectual disability: a cluster randomized trial. Int J Epidemiol 2007;36(1):139-46. Epub 2007 Jan 11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Ponka D
    . The periodic health examination in adults. CMAJ 2014;186(16):1245.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Robertson J,
    2. Hatton C,
    3. Emerson E,
    4. Baines S
    . The impact of health checks for people with intellectual disabilities: an updated systematic review of evidence. Res Dev Disabil 2014;35(10):2450-62. Epub 2014 Jun 28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Lennox NG,
    2. Brolan CE,
    3. Dean J,
    4. Ware RS,
    5. Boyle FM,
    6. Taylor Gomez M,
    7. et al
    . General practitioners’ views on perceived and actual gains, benefits and barriers associated with the implementation of an Australian health assessment for people with intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res 2013;57(10):913-22. Epub 2012 Jul 10.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Lennox N,
    2. Ware R,
    3. Bain C,
    4. Gomez MT,
    5. Cooper SA
    . Effects of health screening for adults with intellectual disability: a pooled analysis. Br J Gen Pract 2011;61(584):193-6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Walmsley J
    . An investigation into the implementation of annual health checks for people with intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disabil 2011;15(3):157-66.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Wilkinson J,
    2. Dreyfus D,
    3. Cerreto M,
    4. Bokhour B
    . “Sometimes I feel overwhelmed”: educational needs of family physicians caring for people with intellectual disability. Intellect Dev Disabil 2012;50(3):243-50.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Ouellette-Kuntz H,
    2. Cobigo V,
    3. Balogh R,
    4. Wilton A,
    5. Lunsky Y
    . The uptake of secondary prevention by adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2015;28(1):43-54.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.↵
    1. Rosser WW,
    2. Colwill JM,
    3. Kasperski J,
    4. Wilson L
    . Progress of Ontario’s family health team model: a patient-centered medical home. Ann Fam Med 2011;9(2):165-71.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Durbin J,
    2. Selick A,
    3. Casson I,
    4. Green L,
    5. Spassiani N,
    6. Perry A,
    7. et al
    . Evaluating the implementation of health checks for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities in primary care: the importance of organizational context. Intellect Dev Disabil 2016;54(2):136-50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Sullivan W,
    2. Developmental Disabilities Primary Care Initiative
    , editor. Tools for the primary care of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Toronto, ON: MUMS Guideline Clearing House, Surrey Place Centre; 2016. Available from: http://ddprimarycare.surreyplace.ca/tools-2/. Accessed 2019 Feb 2.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Brauer P,
    2. Gorber S,
    3. Shaw E,
    4. Singh H,
    5. Bell N,
    6. Shane A,
    7. et al
    . Recommendations for prevention of weight gain and use of behavioural and pharmacologic interventions to manage overweight and obesity in adults in primary care. Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 2015;187(3):184-95. Epub 2015 Jan 26.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  21. 21.
    1. Population Health and Prevention, Prevention and Cancer Control
    . 2015 Prevention system quality index: technical appendix. Toronto, ON: Cancer Care Ontario; 2015.
  22. 22.
    1. Glazier R,
    2. Hutchison B,
    3. Kopp A
    . Comparison of family health teams to other Ontario primary care models, 2004/05 to 2011/12. Toronto, ON: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2015.
  23. 23.↵
    1. Canadian Diabetes Association
    . 2013 Clinical practice guidelines, quick reference guide. Toronto, ON: Canadian Diabetes Association; 2016.
  24. 24.↵
    1. Lennox NG,
    2. Diggens JN,
    3. Ugoni AM
    . The general practice care of people with intellectual disability: barriers and solutions. J Intellect Disabil Res 1997;41(5):380-90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Lewis S,
    2. Stenfert-Kroese B
    . An investigation of nursing staff attitudes and emotional reactions towards patients with intellectual disability in a general hospital setting. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2010;23(4):355-65.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    1. Balogh R,
    2. Wood J,
    3. Isaacs B,
    4. Isaacs B
    . Care of adults with developmental disabilities. Effects of a continuing education course for primary care providers. Can Fam Physician 2015;61:316-24.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Taggart L,
    2. Coates V,
    3. Tuesdale-Kennedy M
    . Management and quality indicators of diabetes mellitus in people with intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disabil Res 2013;57(12):1152-63. Epub 2012 Oct 29.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Buchman S,
    2. Rozmovits L,
    3. Glazier RH
    . Equity and practice issues in colorectal cancer screening. Mixed-methods study. Can Fam Physician 2016;62:e186-93. Available from: www.cfp.ca/content/cfp/62/4/e186.full.pdf. Accessed 2019 Feb 6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Cancer Care Ontario
    . Ontario cancer screening performance report 2016. Toronto, ON: Cancer Care Ontario; 2016.
  30. 30.↵
    1. Parish SL,
    2. Swaine JG,
    3. Son E,
    4. Luken K
    . Determinants of cervical cancer screening among women with intellectual disabilities: evidence from medical records. Public Health Rep 2013;128(6):519-26.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  31. 31.↵
    1. Watkins LV,
    2. Colgate R
    . Improving healthcare for people with intellectual disabilities: the development of an evidence-based teaching programme. Adv Ment Health Intellect Disabil 2016;10(6):333-41.
    OpenUrl
  32. 32.↵
    1. Zworth M,
    2. Selick A,
    3. Durbin J,
    4. Casson I,
    5. Lunsky Y
    . Improving care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Role of clerical staff. Can Fam Physician 2019;65(Suppl 1):S8-10.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Bakker-van Gijssel EJ,
    2. Lucassen PLBJ,
    3. Olde Hartman TC,
    4. van Son L,
    5. Assendelft WJJ,
    6. van Schrojenstein Lantman-de Valk HMJ
    . Health assessment instruments for people with intellectual disabilities. A systematic review. Res Dev Disabil 2017;64:12-24.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. Casson I,
    2. Durbin J,
    3. Grier L,
    4. Lunsky Y,
    5. Perry A,
    6. Selick A
    . Implementing health checks for adults with developmental disabilities: a toolkit for primary care providers. Toronto, ON: Health Care Access Research and Developmental Disabilities; 2016. Available from: www.porticonetwork.ca/documents/38160/99698/Primary+Care+Toolkit_FINAL_ym2.pdf/dfa654d6-8463-41da-9b79-3478315503eb. Accessed 2019 Feb 6.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Family Physician: 65 (Suppl 1)
Canadian Family Physician
Vol. 65, Issue Suppl 1
1 Apr 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The College of Family Physicians of Canada.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Improving the quality of primary care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The College of Family Physicians of Canada
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The College of Family Physicians of Canada web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Improving the quality of primary care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities
Janet Durbin, Avra Selick, Ian Casson, Laurie Green, Andrea Perry, Megan Abou Chacra, Yona Lunsky
Canadian Family Physician Apr 2019, 65 (Suppl 1) S66-S72;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Share
Improving the quality of primary care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities
Janet Durbin, Avra Selick, Ian Casson, Laurie Green, Andrea Perry, Megan Abou Chacra, Yona Lunsky
Canadian Family Physician Apr 2019, 65 (Suppl 1) S66-S72;
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Improving access to primary care and annual health checks for people who have a learning disability: a multistakeholder qualitative study
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Electronic consultation questions asked to addiction medicine specialists by primary care providers
  • Sociodemographic variation in use of and preferences for digital technologies among patients in primary care
  • Journey of a pill
Show more Research

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Collection française
    • Résumés de recherche

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Collections - English
  • Collections - Française

For Authors

  • Authors and Reviewers
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Permissions
  • Terms of Use

General Information

  • About CFP
  • About the CFPC
  • Advertisers
  • Careers & Locums
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Subscribers

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • RSS Feeds

Copyright © 2025 by The College of Family Physicians of Canada

Powered by HighWire