People with disabilities may be disproportionally affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We synthesize the literature on broader health and social impacts on people with disabilities arising from lockdown-related measures. Methods: Scoping review with thematic analysis. Up to mid-September 2020, seven scientific databases and three pre-print servers were searched to identify empirical or perspective papers addressing lockdown-related disparities experienced by people with disabilities. Snowballing searches and experts’ consultation also occurred. Two independent reviewers took eligibility decisions and performed data extractions. Results: Out of 1026 unique references, 85 addressed lockdown-related disparities experienced by people with disabilities. Ten primary and two central themes were identified: (1) Disrupted access to healthcare (other than for COVID-19); (2) Reduced physical activity leading to health and functional decline; (3) From physical distance and inactivity to social isolation and loneliness; (4) Disruption of personal assistance and community support networks; (5) Children with disabilities disproportionally affected by school closures; (6) Psychological consequences of disrupted routines, activities, and support; (7) Family and informal caregiver burden and stress; (8) Risks of maltreatment, violence, and self-harm; (9) Reduced employment and/or income exacerbating disparities; and (10) Digital divide in access to health, education, and support services. Lack of disability-inclusive response and emergency preparedness and structural, pre-pandemic disparities were the central themes. Conclusions: Lockdown-related measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic can disproportionally affect people with disabilities with broader impact on their health and social grounds. Lack of disability-inclusive response and emergency preparedness and pre-pandemic disparities created structural disadvantages, exacerbated during the pandemic. Both structural disparities and their pandemic ramifications require the development and implementation of disability-inclusive public health and policy measures.

Assistive technology (AT) is a powerful enabler of participation. The World Health Organization’s Global Collaboration on Assistive Technology (GATE) programme is actively working towards access to assistive technology for all. Developed through collaborative work as a part of the Global Research, Innovation and Education on Assistive Technology (GREAT) Summit, this position paper provides a “state of the science” view of AT users, conceptualized as “People” within the set of GATE strategic “P”s. People are at the core of policy, products, personnel and provision. AT is an interface between the person and the life they would like to lead. People’s preferences, perspectives and goals are fundamental to defining and determining the success of AT. Maximizing the impact of AT in enabling participation requires an individualized and holistic understanding of the value and meaning of AT for the individual, taking a universal model perspective, focusing on the person, in context, and then considering the condition and/or the technology. This paper aims to situate and emphasize people at the centre of AT systems: we highlight personal meanings and perspectives on AT use and consider the role of advocacy, empowerment and co-design in developing and driving AT processes.

This study aims to synthesize the literature on any disproportionate health risks or consequences of a COVID-19 infection for people with disabilities. Scoping review with a descriptive thematic analysis was carried out. Up to mid-September 2020, seven scientific databases and three preprint servers were searched to identify empirical or perspective papers. Snowballing searches and expert’ consultations also took place. Two independent reviewers were used for the screenings and data extractions. Of 1027 references, 58 were included, 15 of which were empirical articles. The thematic analysis showed that: (1) People with disabilities living in residential or long-term care facilities were more likely to have greater infection rates; (2) Intersecting mediators of greater infection risks were multiple (e.g., lack of accessible information); (3) People with disabilities often face greater health problems when infected; and (4) Unethical disadvantages in the rationing of lifesaving and critical care can be experienced by people with disabilities. Conclusions: Beyond any health-related vulnerabilities (e.g., comorbidity rates), multiple yet modifiable environmental factors can provide disproportionate health risks and consequences of a COVID-19 infection for people with disabilities. Public health and policy measures must prevent or reduce modifiable environmental risks.

Effective interventions for trauma-related psychopathology exist but there are considerable barriers to access and uptake by refugee groups. There is a clear need for culturally appropriate and accessible interventions designed in collaboration with refugee groups. Islamic Trauma Healing is a lay led, group intervention specifically targeting healing the mental wounds of trauma within local mosques. Using Prophet stories and turning to Allah about traumatic experiences, this program incorporates cognitive and exposure principles into an Islamic-informed intervention. In Study 1, following a community event describing the program, 39 Somali participants completed a brief trauma screening and interest measure. In Study 2, pre- to post-group pilot data related to PTSD, depression, somatic symptoms, well-being, and satisfaction was examined for men’s and women’s groups (N = 13). Qualitative analysis of group and leader feedback was conducted. Both studies suggest a strong perceived need and match with the Islamic faith for the intervention, with large effects from the pre- to post-group (g = 0.76 to 3.22). Qualitative analysis identified themes of community, faith integration, healing, and growth. The program was well-received by participants and offers a promising model for the delivery of trauma-focused intervention to Muslim refugee communities.

Prazosin, a centrally active alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonist, has reduced nightmares and sleep disturbances in placebo-controlled studies involving patients with combat and civilian related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In this retrospective chart review, we analyzed data from 23 refugees diagnosed with chronic PTSD who were treated with prazosin. The recurrent distressing dreams item of the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) was used to quantify nightmare severity. A Clinical Global Impressions-Change (CGI-C) score assessed change in overall PTSD severity exclusive of nightmares. Using a paired-samples t-test, we found that CAPS scores decreased significantly (p <0.0005) from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment with a stable dose of prazosin. Overall PTSD severity was "markedly improved" in 6 patients, "moderately improved" in 11 patients, and "minimally improved" in 6 patients. These data provide preliminary support for the use of prazosin in targeting reduction of trauma-related nightmares and promoting improvement of global clinical status within an international sample of severely traumatized refugee patients.