Acceptability of virtual psychiatric consultations for routine follow-ups post COVID-19 pandemic for people with intellectual disabilities: cross-sectional study

Abstract

<jats:sec id="S2056472424000218_sec_a1"> <jats:title>Background</jats:title> <jats:p>After the rapid implementation of digital health services during the COVID-19 pandemic, a paucity of research exists about the suitability of remote consulting in people with intellectual disabilities and their carers, particularly for neuropsychiatric reviews.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472424000218_sec_a2"> <jats:title>Aim</jats:title> <jats:p>This study examines when remote neuropsychiatric routine consulting is suitable for this population.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472424000218_sec_a3" sec-type="methods"> <jats:title>Method</jats:title> <jats:p>A survey was conducted of people with intellectual disabilities and their carers, examining their preference between face-to-face and video consultations for ongoing neuropsychiatric reviews within a rural countywide intellectual disability service in Cornwall, England (population: 538 000). The survey was sent to all adults with intellectual disabilities open to the service on 30 July 2022, closing on 30 September 2022. Participants were asked to provide responses on 11 items predesigned and co-produced between clinicians and experts by experience. The entire service caseload of people had White ethnicity, reflecting the ethnic demographics of Cornwall. Responses received without consent were excluded from the study dataset.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472424000218_sec_a4" sec-type="results"> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Of 271 eligible participants, 119 responses were received, 104 of whom consented to having their anonymised data used for research analysis. There were no significant differences between preferences and age and gender variables. There was no statistically significant difference regarding preference for the reintroduction of face-to-face appointments (52.0%) compared with video consultations (48.0%). Travel distance (&gt;10 miles) to the clinical setting was important but did not outweigh benefits for those preferring a face-to-face appointment.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec id="S2056472424000218_sec_a5" sec-type="conclusions"> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>This study offers insights into the factors that influence preferences about what type of neuropsychiatric appointment is most suitable for people with intellectual disabilities.</jats:p> </jats:sec>