European Psychiatry - Volume 41 - April 2017

603 / 916

25th European Congress of Psychiatry / European Psychiatry 41S (2017) S583–S644 S599
chotropic medications to people with ID without a mental disorder
to manage their behaviors. There are significant strains on mental
health services to manage people with ID and CB. This presentation
discusses. Describe people with CB and ID and their characteristics
including mental disorder, use of psychotropic medications, socio
demographic factors and financial costs to look after them. Social
and health care approach to look after people with CB in the UK,
Challenges to develop services for people with CB in ID in Germany
and Poland. Do we need specialist services for people with ID and
CB? Pros and cons.
Disclosure of interest COI: Bhathika Perera, I have received travel
grants from pharmaceutical companies to attend ADHD confer-
ences and I have been a speaker at pharmaceutical company
sponsored events on ADHD.
EV0599
Descriptive study of people, with
intellectual disability, presenting with
challenging behavior in north London,
UK
B. Perera ∗, K. Courtenay
Barnet, Enfiled and Haringey Mental Health trust, Learning
Disabilities, London, United Kingdom
∗ Corresponding author.
Prevalence of intellectual disability (ID) ranges from 0.05 to 1.55%.
A total of 10–15% of the people with ID present with challenging
behaviour (CB). This causes a significant strain on mental health
services. People with ID often end up staying in psychiatric inpa-
tient units for longer periods. Most people with ID move out of
their family home to various care settings due to severity of their
behavioural difficulties. This descriptive study shows characteris-
tic features of people with ID and CB and financial costs to look
after them in the community. This study highlights the importance
to improve services to manage challenging behaviour, which may
lead to better quality of life to the person with CB and reduction in
financial pressures.
Disclosure of interest COI: Bhathika Perera has received grants to
attend conferences and speak at ADHD conferences by pharmaceu-
tical companies.
EV0600
An evidenced based checklist to
support anti-dementia medication
withdrawal in people with down
syndrome (DS), intellectual disability
(Id) and dementia
R. Shankar ∗, S. Ram
1 Cornwall Foundation NHS Trust, ID neuropsychiatry, Truro, United
Kingdom
2 Somerset Partnership Nhs Foundation Trust, Intellectual Disabilites,
Taunton, United Kingdom
∗ Corresponding author.
DSwith aging is associatedwith greatly increased risk of developing
dementia similar to Alzheimer’s. Anti-dementia drug discontinua-
tion is recommended when clinical benefit is not determined. In DS
it is more complex as medication ill effects of stopping needs to be
weighed in balance to extraneous processes such as environment
changes, sensory impediments and physical ill health and natural
progression of dementia.
Aim Can identified risk factors extracted from a comprehensive
literature review be developed into an evidence based check list
to support risk minimized person centered withdrawal of anti-
dementia drugs when considered not to be efficacious in DS?
Method A detailed literature review using Medline, PsychInfo,
Cinahl and Embase with relevant search terms in various per-
mutations and combinations without any date limit enquiring
current evidence base on anti-dementia medication withdrawal
was conducted. The review also looked to extract the common
risk factors in stopping medication. All risk factors were col-
lated, reviewed by a focus group of experts, developed into a
checklist.
Results Thirty abstracts were obtained following the search.
Six papers were short-listed. No papers identified a structured
approach to medication reduction. An 18-factor checklist was
applied prospectively to 30 cases. The checklist was sensitive to
identify change to guide clinical decision-making.
Conclusions Currently, decision to peg medication withdrawal
risk is arbitrary and clinical in dementia especially in DS
dementia. The evidenced based developed checklist is useful to
support and structure clinical decisions. It helps clinicians and
patients to focus on promoting safety, reduce harm and guide
treatment.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.
EV0601
Descriptive study of patients with
intellectual disability attended in a
community mental health care center
S. Oller Canet ∗, E. Pérez Sánchez , L. Alba Pale , E. Mur Mila ,
B. Samsó Buixareu , C. Mizrahi Recasens , S. Gasque Llopis ,
S. Castillo Maga˜na
1 Institut de Neuropsiquiatria i Addicions, Centre Emili Mira- Parc de
Salut Mar, Centre de Salut Mental Martí Julià, Santa Coloma de
Gramenet, Spain
2 Institut de Neuropsiquiatria i Addicions, Parc de Salut Mar, Centre
de Salut Mental La Mina, Sant Adrà de Besòs, Spain
∗ Corresponding author.
Introduction The rate of mental illness among people with intel-
lectual disability is at least 2.5 times higher than in the general
population
Objective To describe the clinical and sociodemographic char-
acteristics of all patients with intellectual disability treated in a
community mental health care center (CMH) located in a city
of 120,000 inhabitants on the outskirts of Barcelona with a high
poverty index.
Methods Documents and patient records were reviewed. Clini-
cal, sociodemographic and other treatment data of patients with
intellectual disability treated at the CMH were collected.
Results The sample consisted of 118 patients. Mean age: 39.5
(SD: 15), 54% men. 92% single and 23.7% legally incapacitated.
46.6% never completed basic education and 44.1% completed
primary school. Employment status: 14.4% unemployed, 14.4%
currently active, and 50% pensioned. Patients living mainly with
their family (parents:) 86%. 68.6% of patients showed aggressive
behavior, but the rate of hospital psychiatric admissions was low
(mean: 1.1 (SD: 2.3)). Organic comorbidity: 44.9%. Functional-
ity measured with GAF mean: 45 (SD: 12). Level of intellectual
disability was mostly mild (62%). Psychiatric diagnoses were:
psychotic disorders: 49.25%, affective disorders: 6.8%, personal-
ity disorder: 3.4%, Obsessive-compulsive disorder: 3.4%, autism:
11.9% and other diagnoses: 37.3%. Patients treated with anti-
psychotics: 78.8%, anti-depressants: 40.7%, and mood stabilizers:
70.5%.
Conclusions Intellectually disabled patients from our sample
showed high comorbidity with psychotic disorders, were highly
medicated and often exhibited aggressive behavior.
Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their decla-
ration of competing interest.