The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Diagnostic patterns among people with intellectual disabilities compared to the general population (IDcare)

IASSIDD 2024 - Chicago (USA), August 5-8 2024

Jimmie Kristensson, Anna Axmon, Magnus Sandberg, Emilie Stroh

[View presentation] [Project main site]

Due to changes in the definition of the gPop cohort, the numbers below and in the presentation differ slightly from those that were provided in the book of abstracts.

Background: People with intellectual disabilities (ID) often have an extensive and complex disease panorama. However, more knowledge is needed about the disease panorama to gain a deeper understanding of co-morbidity and potential care needs.

Methods: Among all people living in Skåne on January 1st, 2014, we established a cohort of 14 716 people with ID (either diagnosis of ID (F7) or Down Syndrome (Q90), or service and support for people with ID or autism spectrum disorder). After exclusion of those with a family member in the ID cohort, the general population (gPop) cohort comprised 1 232 299 people. Diagnoses on diseases (i.e., ICD-10 chapters I-XIV, excluding diagnoses of developmental disorders) were collected and compared between ID and gPop by age group. 

Findings: There were both similarities and differences in the prevalence of disease for ID and gPop. E.g., for children, acute upper respiratory infections were the most common diagnosis diagnosed at least once during the study period in both cohorts, whereas disorders of ocular muscles, binocular movement, accommodation, and refraction were the second most common diagnosis registered at least once in ID (41% compared to 14% in gPop). Moreover, the difference in distribution of age-related diseases (e.g., Organic, including symptomatic, mental disorders, including dementia) between the ID and gPop cohort supports the hypothesis of earlier aging in ID. 

Conclusions: When allocating resources for health care to vulnerable groups in society, it is important to acknowledge both differences and similarities in disease patterns with the general population. People with ID comprise a vulnerable group that is both different and alike their age peers in the general population. It is especially important to understand the earlier aging in this group, and its impact on health care needs.

Research group

Associate professor Magnus Sandberg (PI for IDcare)

Associate professor Anna Axmon (PI for the covid follow-up study)

Professor Ulf Gerdtham

Associate professor Jimmie Kristensson

Collaborations

Ass prof Julia Bahner, Lund University, Sweden

Dr Trine Lise Bakken, Oslo University Hospital, Norway [prevalence of schizophrenia]

Dr Petra Björne, City of Malmö, Sweden

Prof Darren Chadwick, Liverpool John Moores University, UK

Prof David Edvardsson, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia [dementia]

Prof Kristina Edvardsson, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia [pregnancy outcomes]

Dr Karin Engström, Lund University, Sweden

Dr Hanna Falk Erhag, University of Gothenburg, Sweden

Dr Alessandra Grotta, Stockholm University, Sweden

Ass prof Björn Hofvander, Lund University, Sweden

Prof Silke Kern, University of Gothenburg, Sweden

Dr Katarina Lauruschkus, Lund University, Sweden

Dr Can Liu, Stockholm University and Karolinska Institutet, Sweden

Prof Yona Lunsky, University of Toronto, Canada

Ass prof Hugo Lövheim, Umeå University, Sweden [dementia]

Dr Emilie Stroh, Lund University, Sweden [care transitioning] [diabetes]