Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Multiple disabilities

Multiple disabilities denotes the co-occurrence of two or more impairments in an individual, such as paired with blindness or orthopedic impairment, wherein the interaction of these conditions generates educational needs of such severity that they cannot be sufficiently met by programs tailored to any one impairment alone (with deaf-blindness classified separately). This definitional framework, enshrined in the (IDEA), emphasizes the compounded functional deficits arising from the interplay of disabilities rather than their isolated effects, often involving cognitive, sensory, motor, and communicative domains that demand multifaceted interventions from onward. Students categorized under multiple disabilities typically exhibit profound limitations in adaptive behaviors, including , , and expressive communication, alongside heightened vulnerability to secondary issues like seizures or respiratory complications due to the synergistic impact of impairments. Educational programming for this population prioritizes individualized, functional skill-building—such as augmentative communication devices or —over academic curricula, as the primary impairments frequently preclude integration without extensive . Representing about 2 percent of all U.S. students served under IDEA, this group underscores the necessity for interdisciplinary teams comprising educators, therapists, and medical specialists to address causal chains of dependency and prevent institutionalization. While prevalence data derive largely from administrative records rather than population-wide epidemiological studies, the category highlights empirically observed realities of non-additive burdens, where single-disability accommodations prove causally insufficient.

Definition and Classification

In the United States, the legal definition of multiple disabilities is established under the (IDEA), codified in 34 CFR § 300.8(c)(7), as concomitant impairments—such as combined with blindness or orthopedic impairment—the combination of which causes such severe educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in programs solely for one of the impairments; this category excludes deaf-blindness, which has its own distinct classification. This definition emphasizes the interactive severity of co-occurring conditions rather than mere multiplicity, requiring evaluation to confirm that no single-disability program suffices, thereby qualifying affected children for individualized education programs (IEPs) tailored to their compounded needs. Educationally, multiple disabilities in contexts align directly with the IDEA framework, where the focus is on the resultant barriers to learning that demand comprehensive, often interdisciplinary interventions beyond those for isolated impairments. For instance, state implementations, such as in and , mirror the federal language, defining it as simultaneous impairments like with sensory or motor deficits that preclude standard accommodations, necessitating supports in areas including communication, , and adaptive skills. Evaluations for eligibility typically involve multidisciplinary assessments to document the non-overlapping impact of each disability, ensuring services address the holistic severity rather than additive effects alone. Internationally, no unified legal definition specifically for "multiple disabilities" exists in major frameworks like the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD, adopted 2006), which broadly defines persons with disabilities as those with long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments that, in interaction with barriers, hinder participation in society, without delineating multiplicity. This social model approach prioritizes environmental barriers over categorical enumeration, potentially encompassing multiple impairments under general protections for reasonable accommodations and non-discrimination, though it lacks the operational specificity of U.S. education law for service eligibility. European Union directives similarly adopt the CRPD's inclusive scope, focusing on equal treatment without isolated provisions for co-morbid conditions.

Distinction from Single Disabilities

Multiple disabilities differ from single disabilities in that the former involve the concomitant presence of two or more impairments whose combined effects produce functional limitations exceeding those attributable to any single impairment alone, often necessitating integrated interventions across multiple domains rather than targeted programs for one condition. Under the , multiple disabilities are defined as simultaneous impairments—such as combined with blindness or orthopedic impairment—the interaction of which causes such severe educational needs that they cannot be adequately addressed through programs designed solely for one of the impairments; this excludes deaf-blindness, which constitutes a separate category. In contrast, a single disability typically refers to one primary impairment, such as isolated or specific , where educational and support strategies can be tailored to that condition without the compounding challenges of overlapping deficits in cognition, mobility, , or communication. The distinction hinges on the multiplicative impact of co-occurring conditions, where the severity arises not merely from summation but from synergistic barriers; for instance, alone might allow for supports, but paired with motor impairments, it impedes even basic and environmental navigation, demanding comprehensive, multidisciplinary approaches. This differentiation is critical in assessment and service provision, as individuals with single disabilities often qualify for categorical programs under IDEA (e.g., speech-language impairment services), whereas multiple disabilities require individualized education programs (IEPs) that account for pervasive, non-isolable needs, potentially spanning medical, behavioral, and environmental accommodations. Empirical evaluations must verify that the combined impairments preclude effective management within single-disability frameworks, avoiding misclassification of co-morbidities that do not interact to elevate severity.

Etiology and Risk Factors

Genetic and Congenital Causes

Genetic etiologies predominate among the causes of multiple disabilities, particularly those involving co-occurring with sensory or motor impairments, as genetic disruptions during early development often affect multiple organ systems and neural pathways. Chromosomal abnormalities, such as numerical aberrations like 21 (), represent a key category, occurring in approximately 1 in 700 live births and resulting in alongside congenital heart defects in 40-50% of cases, in 60-80%, and visual impairments such as cataracts or refractive errors in over 50%. Structural chromosomal variants, including deletions or duplications, similarly contribute by altering and leading to syndromic presentations with intellectual deficits, dysmorphic features, and comorbidities like or skeletal anomalies. Single-gene disorders also drive multiple disabilities through monogenic mutations impacting neurodevelopment and systemic function. , caused by expansion of CGG repeats in the gene, is the most common inherited , affecting 1 in 4,000 males and 1 in 8,000 females, with manifestations including moderate to severe , traits in up to 60% of cases, and physical features such as or connective tissue laxity that exacerbate motor challenges. Other examples include (MECP2 mutations), primarily in females, featuring acquired , loss of purposeful hand use, and profound intellectual and motor regression. These conditions underscore the causal role of disrupted protein function in and neuronal connectivity, as evidenced by molecular studies. Congenital non-genetic causes, while less heritable, arise from teratogenic or disruptive prenatal events that impair multiple developmental domains. defects, such as , stem from incomplete closure of the around the third gestational week and affect about 1 in 1,000 pregnancies in regions without fortification, yielding lower limb paralysis, bowel/bladder dysfunction, and secondary cognitive impairments from associated in 80-90% of myelomeningocele cases. Prenatal infections, particularly pathogens, induce inflammation and tissue damage leading to pleiotropic effects; congenital (CMV), the most frequent, infects 0.5-1% of newborns and causes in 10-15% (progressive in half), , , and developmental delays in symptomatic infants, with overall neurodevelopmental in up to 50% of untreated severe cases. Multifactorial congenital malformations, influenced by gene-environment interactions like in defects, further illustrate how non-genetic insults amplify vulnerability in genetically susceptible individuals.

Acquired Causes

Acquired causes of multiple disabilities arise from postnatal events or conditions that damage multiple body systems or functions, resulting in concomitant impairments such as combined with sensory, motor, or orthopedic deficits. These differ from congenital origins by occurring after birth, often through , , or environmental insults that disrupt neural or cause widespread tissue damage. Unlike genetic factors, acquired causes are frequently preventable via measures, yet they account for a significant portion of severe, lifelong multiple impairments requiring intensive support. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) represents a leading acquired etiology, typically from falls, motor vehicle crashes, assaults, or sports-related incidents, leading to diffuse axonal damage that impairs cognition, mobility, and sensation simultaneously. In the United States, TBIs contribute to about 2.89 million emergency department visits, 176,000 hospitalizations, and 69,000 deaths annually as of 2014 data, with survivors often facing multiple disabilities including executive dysfunction, paralysis, and visual or auditory deficits depending on injury severity and location. For example, moderate to severe TBIs elevate risks for comorbid epilepsy, neurodegenerative diseases, and chronic motor impairments, with one in 60 Americans living with TBI-related disability as of 2025 estimates. Post-TBI outcomes frequently necessitate multidisciplinary rehabilitation due to the interplay of cognitive, physical, and behavioral sequelae. Infectious diseases constitute another major category, particularly those invading the or causing systemic inflammation in early childhood. Bacterial , for instance, can induce alongside profound or orthopedic deformities from associated , with historical data showing complication rates exceeding 20% for neurological sequelae in untreated cases. Viral infections like or post-neonatal may similarly yield multiple impairments through encephalitis-induced brain atrophy and secondary motor deficits. , though now rare due to , exemplifies acquired paralytic effects combined with respiratory and cognitive burdens from poliomyelitis outbreaks prior to eradication efforts. Childhood infections broadly correlate with elevated risks for diagnoses, potentially via inflammatory cascades disrupting neurodevelopment, though causality requires isolating infection timing from confounders like . Additional mechanisms include hypoxic-ischemic events, such as near-drowning or asphyxiation, which deprive the of oxygen and precipitate impairments like variants with intellectual and sensory losses. Toxic exposures, including or accidental ingestion of neurotoxins, can erode cognitive function while inducing peripheral neuropathies or organ damage leading to mobility issues. These causes underscore the role of causal chains—initial insult propagating to secondary complications—emphasizing early to mitigate cascading disabilities. Epidemiological data on acquired multiple disabilities remain limited, but TBI and infection-related cases highlight vulnerabilities in vulnerable populations like young children, where prevention via safety protocols and averts much morbidity.

Prevalence and Epidemiology

Global and National Statistics

Globally, comprehensive statistics on multiple disabilities—defined as concomitant impairments (such as combined with sensory or motor deficits) resulting in severe functional limitations—are limited, as most international data aggregates disabilities without distinguishing co-occurring profiles or relies on varying national definitions. The estimates that 1.3 billion people, or 16% of the global population, experienced significant in 2023, with higher rates in low- and middle-income countries due to factors like aging populations and chronic diseases. Among children, reported nearly 240 million with disabilities worldwide in 2021, but subsets with multiple impairments lack precise quantification, though regional studies indicate co-occurrence rates exceeding 10% in populations. In the United States, the multiple disabilities category under the (IDEA) serves students aged 3–21 whose combined impairments necessitate specialized educational supports beyond single-disability accommodations. In school year 2022–23, this category represented 2% of the 7.5 million students receiving services, equating to approximately 150,000 individuals. Prevalence among children with any has increased, from 9.8% with multiple developmental disabilities in 2016 to 11.5% in 2022, reflecting trends in and reporting. For adults, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noted in 2016 that multiple functional disabilities were prevalent among those with any limitation, particularly in and , though exact aggregates remain underreported outside educational contexts. National data from other high-income countries show analogous patterns but with less granularity on multiple disabilities. In the , overall prevalence was 24% of the working-age population in 2022–23, with co-morbidities common in subgroups like developmental disorders, yet specific multiple impairment statistics are not disaggregated in official reports. In the , 23.9% of people aged 16 and over reported activity limitations in 2024, with higher co-occurrence in older cohorts, but harmonized data on multiple disabilities emphasizes policy gaps rather than precise prevalence. These figures underscore undercounting risks in global and national surveys, often due to self-reporting biases and exclusion of mild or undiagnosed cases.

Demographic Patterns

Prevalence of multiple disabilities, defined as the co-occurrence of two or more significant impairments (such as , sensory, or physical), shows clear demographic variations influenced by biological, environmental, and socioeconomic factors. , racial and ethnic groups exhibit disparities, with experiencing the highest overall rates at 14%, followed by at 11%, Latinos at 8%, and Asians at 5%; these patterns extend to multiple disabilities, where co-occurring and disorder is more prevalent among Black and Hispanic children compared to white children, potentially reflecting differences in genetic predispositions, access, and diagnostic practices. Age is a primary driver of prevalence, as disabilities often accumulate over time through aging-related degeneration or unaddressed early conditions. Among U.S. children and adolescents, the overall rate of multiple developmental disabilities stands at 10.6%, with higher concentrations in younger cohorts affected by congenital causes; in adults, rates escalate, reaching 13.0% in ages 18–44 and 26.2% in 45–64 across ethnic groups, driven by acquired comorbidities like impairments alongside cognitive decline. Globally, developmental disabilities contributing to multiples affect approximately 317 million children and adolescents, with rising in older pediatric groups due to untreated infections or nutritional deficits in low-resource settings. Gender patterns favor higher male prevalence, particularly for neurodevelopmental multiples; in U.S. pediatric samples, males comprise 51.7% of cases with multiple developmental disabilities, consistent with sex-linked genetic factors in conditions like co-occurring with . amplifies risks, as lower-income households correlate with elevated multiple disability rates due to causal pathways like poor , environmental toxins, and delayed interventions; emerges as the strongest predictor of intersections with and , perpetuating cycles in marginalized communities.
Demographic FactorKey Pattern in Multiple Disabilities Prevalence
Race/Ethnicity (U.S.)Highest in (14% overall disability base, elevated co-occurrences); lowest in Asians (5–8%)
Age10.6% in children; rises to 26.2% by mid-adulthood due to accumulation
GenderMale predominance (51.7% in pediatric multiples), linked to X-chromosome vulnerabilities
Socioeconomic StatusHigher in low-SES groups via environmental and access barriers
Geographically, urban-rural divides show higher multiples in rural U.S. areas from limited healthcare, while globally, low- and middle-income countries bear 80–90% of the pediatric burden from preventable causes like perinatal complications. These patterns underscore causal realities over diagnostic artifacts, though institutional biases in may undercount in underserved demographics.

Characteristics and Impairments

Cognitive and Intellectual Aspects

Individuals with multiple disabilities often experience concomitant , characterized by significant limitations in intellectual functioning—typically an IQ below 70-75—and adaptive behaviors across conceptual, social, and practical domains, with onset during the developmental period before age 18. These impairments manifest as deficits in reasoning, problem-solving, learning, and memory, which are compounded by co-occurring sensory, motor, or physical disabilities, leading to more severe overall functional limitations than in isolated . For example, in educational classifications under the (IDEA), multiple disabilities frequently involve intellectual disability paired with conditions like blindness or orthopedic impairment, resulting in educational needs too complex for single-disability programs. The severity of cognitive aspects in multiple disabilities spans mild to profound levels, with profound cases showing minimal verbal communication, limited self-care skills, and reliance on others for daily activities. Co-morbidities such as or sensory losses can further impair cognitive processing by restricting environmental interaction and skill acquisition; for instance, motor limitations may prevent manipulative play essential for cognitive growth in . Epidemiological data from U.S. children aged 3-17 years reveal intellectual disability prevalence rising with age (1.39% in ages 3-7 to 2.35% in ages 13-17), and in subsets with multiple developmental disabilities, the rate reaches about 10.6% overall, often involving overlapping cognitive delays. Assessing cognitive and intellectual functioning in this population poses unique challenges, as standard tools like IQ tests assume intact sensory and motor abilities, potentially underestimating true potential due to confounding factors like or severe mobility restrictions. Specialized approaches, such as non-verbal assessments or observation-based scales, are recommended to isolate cognitive contributions from physical barriers, though evidence on their reliability remains limited in profound cases. Early identification is critical, as unaddressed cognitive deficits in multiple disabilities correlate with poorer long-term adaptive outcomes, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary evaluations tailored to individual impairment profiles.

Sensory and Motor Impairments

Sensory impairments, including and hearing deficits, frequently co-occur with disabilities in individuals with multiple disabilities, compounding functional limitations. prevalence in adults with disabilities varies by severity and etiology, ranging from 2.2% in young adults with mild excluding to 66.7% in older adults with . In those with severe or profound , up to 92% exhibit , often stemming from genetic syndromes or structural ocular anomalies such as refractive errors, cataracts, or . Hearing impairment affects approximately 30.3% of adults with disabilities, a rate at least 40 times higher than in the general population, primarily due to conductive or sensorineural losses linked to genetic factors like GJB2 mutations or ototoxic exposures. These sensory deficits interact causally with impairments by hindering environmental input, thereby impeding , , and adaptive behaviors, often leading to misattribution of symptoms to cognitive deficits alone. Motor impairments in multiple disabilities typically manifest as severe restrictions in mobility and coordination, classified under (GMFCS) levels IV or V, rendering individuals non-ambulatory without assistance. Characteristics include in about 73% of children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) and in up to 72%, frequently accompanied by musculoskeletal complications such as (prevalence around 52% in affected cohorts). These arise from neurological etiologies like or perinatal brain injury, limiting gross and fine motor skills essential for daily activities, feeding, and communication. In PIMD populations, motor limitations exacerbate dependency, with comorbidities like (affecting 75% ) and respiratory issues further restricting physical function. The confluence of sensory and motor impairments in multiple disabilities intensifies overall disability through bidirectional causal effects: sensory losses degrade via reduced , while motor constraints limit sensory exploration and access. For instance, visual or hearing deficits in non-ambulatory individuals heighten risks of secondary issues, including contractures and sores, as evidenced in PIMD studies where 65% show visual impairments alongside profound motor deficits. Empirical assessments emphasize early detection via specialized tools like functional vision/hearing evaluations to mitigate these interactions, though underdiagnosis persists due to communication barriers.

Health and Medical Comorbidities

Individuals with multiple disabilities, particularly those encompassing profound combined with motor or sensory impairments, exhibit elevated rates of comorbid medical conditions compared to the general population. These comorbidities often stem from underlying neurological vulnerabilities, reduced , and challenges in accessing preventive , leading to a higher burden of illnesses. For instance, epidemiological data indicate that adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) experience significantly higher of conditions such as heart disease, , , and , with heart disease rates notably elevated even after adjusting for age and other factors. Epilepsy represents one of the most prevalent neurological comorbidities, affecting a substantial proportion of individuals with multiple disabilities. In children with profound and multiple disabilities (PIMD), is among the most frequently reported issues, often requiring ongoing management and contributing to further developmental stagnation. Respiratory problems, including recurrent infections and , are also common, exacerbated by impaired swallowing, immobility, and anatomical factors like , which can compromise lung function. Gastrointestinal disorders, such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), feeding difficulties, and constipation, further compound these challenges, with studies linking them to both epileptic activity and side effects in neurodevelopmental cohorts. Multimorbidity—defined as the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions—is particularly pervasive, occurring in approximately 80% of older adults with intellectual disabilities and correlating with greater severity of disability. Cardiovascular conditions like and appear at rates up to 25.6% and 22.8%, respectively, in adults with and neurodevelopmental disabilities, while endocrine issues such as affect around 7.6-9.1%. These patterns underscore the need for integrated medical oversight, as untreated can accelerate functional decline and reduce , with hospital admission rates nearly tripling those in non-disabled even after comorbidity adjustment. Peer-reviewed analyses highlight that while general studies may underreport these due to diagnostic barriers, targeted in IDD cohorts reveals systemic disparities in outcomes attributable to biological and environmental causal factors rather than solely socioeconomic ones.

Assessment and Diagnosis

Diagnostic Criteria and Tools

Multiple disabilities are identified through eligibility criteria established under frameworks like the in the United States, which defines the condition as concomitant impairments—such as combined with blindness or orthopedic impairment—the combination of which results in severe educational needs that cannot be addressed in programs designed for a single impairment alone; deaf-blindness is excluded as a separate category. This requires documentation of at least two distinct impairments, often including one sensory or motor deficit (e.g., , vision impairment, or orthopedic issues) alongside cognitive or other developmental challenges, with the interaction producing functional limitations beyond what either impairment would cause independently. emphasizes functional impact rather than isolated medical conditions, necessitating evidence that the disabilities severely restrict areas like communication, , , or , as verified through multidisciplinary evaluations. Assessment protocols mandate a comprehensive, systematic across medical (including neurological where indicated), psychological, and educational domains to confirm eligibility and rule out misclassification; a child with multiple impairments but insufficient severity for combined needs does not qualify. Tools must be adapted for sensory or motor limitations to avoid underestimating abilities, prioritizing those validated for severe disabilities. Key diagnostic tools include the Developmental Assessment for Individuals with Severe Disabilities (DASH-3), a standardized for ages 6 months through adulthood that evaluates domains such as receptive/expressive communication, , daily living, and motor abilities to inform like Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). For profound cases, inventories of functional assessments—such as those measuring , , and adaptive behaviors—are employed, often in team-based settings to account for psychometric properties tailored to low-functioning individuals. Additional specialized tools, like modified orientation and mobility assessments for vision or motor impairments, support holistic profiling when comorbidities involve . These evaluations prioritize empirical observation over self-report to mitigate biases in standardized testing for this population.

Controversies in Identification and Over-Diagnosis

The identification of multiple disabilities, defined under the (IDEA) as concomitant s (such as combined with blindness or orthopedic ) that cause severe educational needs beyond what can be addressed in programs for single , presents significant diagnostic challenges due to overlapping symptoms across conditions. These complexities can lead to over-identification when assessments fail to disentangle primary from secondary traits, potentially inflating estimates; for instance, U.S. Department of Education data indicate that students in the multiple disabilities category represent about 2% of enrollment, a low but stable figure that masks variability in state-level application of criteria. Critics argue that vague thresholds for "severe" needs encourage broader classifications to secure intensive services, though empirical studies show inconsistent in evaluations, with one analysis highlighting how co-occurring sensory and cognitive deficits complicate objective measurement. A prominent controversy involves the over-diagnosis of disorder () within populations already identified with multiple disabilities, where behaviors such as stereotypies, limited communication, and social withdrawal—hallmarks of —often stem from underlying physical or sensory impairments rather than autism-specific neurology. In children with severe multiple disabilities, including those with or deaf-blindness, diagnostic tools like the () yield high false positives due to adaptations for motor limitations that alter scoring, leading researchers to estimate both under- and over-diagnosis rates exceeding 20-30% in such cohorts. For deaf children with additional disabilities, over-diagnosis of arises from misattributing language delays to social deficits, with studies recommending multidisciplinary panels to mitigate in assessments. This issue is exacerbated by broadened criteria since the in 2013, which some experts, including a key proponent of spectrum expansion, have acknowledged contributes to inaccurate labeling in complex cases, potentially diverting resources from addressing core impairments like mobility or vision loss. Over-diagnosis in this domain raises concerns about and long-term outcomes, as misclassification can result in overly restrictive educational placements or interventions mismatched to actual needs, while systemic incentives—such as federal funding tied to IDEA eligibility—may pressure evaluators toward affirmative diagnoses without rigorous longitudinal verification. Empirical reviews of data reveal no clear population-level increase in true multiple disability incidence to explain stable category enrollment, suggesting diagnostic expansion plays a , though under-diagnosis persists in underserved groups due to access barriers. Proponents of stricter criteria advocate for functional assessments prioritizing causal links between impairments over checklist approaches, citing evidence from low-incidence cohorts where refined protocols reduced erroneous overlays by up to 15%. Despite these debates, no federal mandate standardizes identification protocols across states, perpetuating variability and calls for evidence-based reforms to balance service access with diagnostic precision.

Educational and Developmental Interventions

Specialized vs. Inclusive Education Models

Specialized education models for students with multiple disabilities typically involve segregated settings, such as dedicated special schools or self-contained classrooms, where instruction is customized to address the interplay of impairments like deficits combined with sensory or motor limitations, often incorporating therapeutic interventions, adaptive equipment, and low student-to-teacher ratios. Inclusive education models, by contrast, place these students primarily in general education classrooms with peers without disabilities, supplemented by aids like individualized education plans (IEPs), paraprofessionals, and modifications, aiming to foster alongside academic access. Empirical comparisons reveal mixed outcomes, with specialized models demonstrating stronger academic gains for severe cases due to targeted, intensive instruction that general classrooms often cannot replicate without diluting focus for all students. Research reviews highlight methodological flaws in pro-inclusion studies, including —where higher-functioning students are disproportionately placed in inclusive settings—and inadequate controls for prior achievement or disability severity, leading to overstated benefits. A 2022 Campbell Collaboration synthesis of over 2,000 studies deemed 99% low-quality, finding inconclusive evidence for academic advantages in inclusive placements, with sizes often small (e.g., 0.25 standard deviations in reading/math per Hattie’s aggregation) and inconsistent across domains. For students with multiple disabilities, who comprise a subset requiring coordinated medical-educational supports, specialized settings correlate with sustained progress in adaptive skills and functional independence; for instance, longitudinal data from special classes show higher post-school employment rates (up to 70% in some cohorts) compared to inclusive placements yielding dependency on benefits (e.g., 67% unemployment in one sample). Social and behavioral outcomes favor for peer interactions and reduced in milder cases, yet for profound multiple disabilities, evidence points to superior development in specialized environments, where tailored peer grouping and behavioral interventions mitigate without overwhelming mismatched . et al. (2025) note that while 1% of disabled students have severe needs amenable to intensive separate instruction, policy-driven overlooks this, potentially harming progress; rigorous designs adjusting for severity show no net academic edge for and risks of regression in motor-cognitive integration. Long-term data from the U.S. indicate only 2% of students with disabilities attend separate schools, correlating with persistent gaps in outcomes like (67% vs. 85% general) and , underscoring that hybrid models—leveraging specialized pull-outs—may optimize results over full . Despite ideological for in academic literature, causal analyses prioritize specialized efficacy for complex impairments, as undifferentiated mainstreaming fails to causally address multifaceted barriers.

Evidence-Based Strategies and Outcomes

Evidence-based strategies for educational and developmental interventions targeting individuals with multiple disabilities emphasize individualized, systematic approaches tailored to the profound and heterogeneous nature of impairments, often combining intellectual, sensory, and motor challenges. Systematic instruction, grounded in , involves to break skills into discrete steps, followed by prompting hierarchies (such as time delay or least-to-most prompts), , and techniques to promote skill maintenance across settings. This method has demonstrated efficacy in teaching academic, daily living, and community skills, with reviews of over 128 experiments showing consistent gains in comprehension and for students with severe disabilities, including those with multiple impairments. Peer-mediated interventions, where typically developing peers are trained to deliver or facilitate interactions, enhance both academic and outcomes. Studies indicate that peers using systematic prompting techniques, like constant time delay, improve target students' skill acquisition and peer relationships, with effect sizes indicating moderate to strong improvements in interactions compared to teacher-only delivery. For young children, collaborative team models involving families and professionals, alongside assistive technologies such as (AAC) devices, support communication and , yielding outcomes like increased gesture use and participation in routines. Outcomes vary by intervention intensity and individual profiles but generally show targeted skill gains rather than broad equivalence to peers without disabilities. For learners with profound and multiple disabilities, single-case designs reveal learning potential in communication and adaptive behaviors when is personalized, though large-scale randomized trials are scarce due to population heterogeneity, limiting generalizability. Self-management strategies and visual supports further bolster behavioral regulation and persistence, with umbrella reviews confirming positive effects on and reduced challenging behaviors across disability severities. However, long-term developmental trajectories often remain constrained, with interventions most effective when embedded early and consistently, as evidenced by motor and communication advances in preschoolers using activity-based learning. research in this area, while empirically driven, relies heavily on small-sample studies from contexts, where institutional emphases on may overstate transferable benefits without accounting for causal factors like severity.

Adulthood and Employment Outcomes

Transition to Independent Living

Individuals with multiple disabilities, characterized by profound intellectual impairments combined with significant physical, sensory, or health limitations, face substantial barriers to achieving , as these conditions inherently limit the capacity for self-management of daily activities such as personal care, , and . Empirical studies indicate that full independence without support is rare, with only 6% of adults with intellectual disabilities residing in semi- or fully independent settings, while the majority—66%—remain with family and 24% in supervised community residences. For those with extensive support needs akin to multiple disabilities, residential profiles show 67.5% living in family homes, 27.7% in institutional facilities, and just 4.7% in group homes, underscoring persistent reliance on external assistance. Transition efforts prioritize supported living over institutionalization, involving moves from family or congregate settings to individualized or small-group with for and behavioral support. Longitudinal data reveal that over 20 years, adults with intellectual disabilities experience an average of 0.77 to 1.65 residential moves, often from family homes to supervised options, though multiple transitions correlate with factors like lower and health issues rather than progression toward . Higher adaptive skills predict placement in less restrictive settings, with residents showing up to 25% growth in over a , yet profound impairments necessitate 24/7 oversight, limiting . Outcomes of supported transitions include enhanced through deinstitutionalization, with placements fostering greater adaptive gains and social inclusion compared to institutions, where 32.4% of those with extensive needs remain segregated. However, challenges persist, including safety risks from skill deficits, health comorbidities requiring frequent interventions, and resource shortages, as evidenced by thousands awaiting suitable despite shifts toward . Success hinges on individualized supports like skill training and family involvement, but causal links impairment severity directly to ongoing dependence, with no reliable pathways to unsupervised for profound cases.

Employment Barriers and Supported Models

Individuals with multiple disabilities face amplified employment barriers due to the synergistic effects of co-occurring impairments, such as limitations combined with physical or sensory deficits, which narrow viable job options and heighten demands for customized accommodations. These barriers often exceed those for single-disability cases, as functional limitations compound, leading to reduced productivity, higher absenteeism from comorbidities, and challenges in acquisition or task endurance. For instance, cognitive impairments may impair learning and reliability, while motor disabilities necessitate physical modifications, creating mismatches between worker capabilities and expectations. Empirical data underscore the severity: in 2024, the employment-population ratio for persons with disabilities overall stood at 22.7%, far below 65.5% for those without, with multiple or severe disabilities correlating to even lower rates, often under 15% for intellectual and (IDD) subgroups where co-occurring conditions are prevalent. Common structural obstacles include transportation deficits (reported by 10.6% of non-working disabled individuals), lack of or training (12.2%), and needs for workplace adaptations (around 12.5%), which intensify for multiple disabilities requiring multifaceted supports. Employer-side factors, such as perceived hiring costs and productivity risks, further deter inclusion, though actual accommodation expenses average under $500 per case in many instances. Supported employment models address these challenges through evidence-based interventions prioritizing competitive integrated employment (CIE) over segregated options. The Individual Placement and Support (IPS) model, validated in randomized trials for severe mental illnesses often co-occurring with other disabilities, integrates job search with clinical supports, achieving 50-60% competitive employment rates versus 20% in standard vocational services; adaptations extend its utility to multiple disabilities by emphasizing zero exclusion, rapid placement, and employer partnerships. For IDD with multiple impairments, customized tailors roles to residual strengths, providing job coaches for ongoing assistance, yielding higher retention (up to 70% at one year) and wages than traditional sheltered workshops, which, while offering structure for profound cases, frequently result in subminimum pay and limited skill growth. State programs, like those under U.S. , fund these via time-limited supports, though outcomes vary by disability severity, with profound multiple cases showing modest gains limited by inherent capacity constraints rather than solely external barriers.

Societal and Familial Impacts

Burdens on Families and Caregivers

Families of individuals with multiple disabilities incur substantial financial burdens, encompassing such as medical care, therapies, and adaptive equipment, alongside from parental disruptions. Annual per-child economic burdens range from approximately $450 to $69,500 worldwide, varying by disability severity and access to services. Caregivers of children with disabilities, including multiple impairments, are twice as likely to report high financial stress as those caring for typically developing children, with 25-30% reducing work hours or exiting the workforce due to caregiving demands. Families of children with disabilities face nearly double the risk of financial hardships, such as difficulty paying bills or forgoing medical care, compared to families without such children. Emotional and psychological strains are pronounced, with caregivers exhibiting elevated distress levels linked to the complexity of managing co-occurring impairments. Primary caregivers of children with multiple disabilities report the highest mean burden scores (median 34.5 on the Zarit Burden Interview), surpassing those for single-domain disabilities, with 81% experiencing at least mild burden. Psychological distress affects 21.3% of such caregivers at severe levels (Kessler-6 score >12), over twice the rate (9.2%) among caregivers of non-disabled children, exacerbated by behavioral challenges and limited communication. Over 50% of parents of children with profound and multiple disabilities cite unwelcome disruptions to routines and reduced time as key stressors. Physical demands contribute to caregiver health deterioration, as constant assistance with , feeding, and leads to exhaustion and chronic conditions. Functional disabilities in care recipients correlate with caregivers' physical health declines, including higher rates of , , and musculoskeletal issues. Studies indicate that caregiving for children with life-limiting or multiple disabilities is associated with poorer overall physical health outcomes for parents, independent of socioeconomic factors. Extraordinary time commitments, reported by more than half of families, further compound fatigue, often necessitating 24-hour vigilance without adequate respite. These burdens extend to familial dynamics, straining relationships and sibling well-being through resource diversion and emotional exhaustion, though empirical data on rates show variability rather than uniform elevation across disability types. Lack of formal amplifies these effects, with lower and absence of institutional correlating to intensified burden. Tailored interventions, such as financial aid and respite services, are critical to mitigate these multidimensional pressures.

Economic and Policy Costs

The direct economic costs of multiple disabilities include substantial expenditures on medical care, specialized equipment, residential support, and long-term services, often exceeding those for single disabilities due to compounded care needs. , lifetime costs for individuals with disabilities—a frequent element in cases of multiple disabilities—average approximately $1,014,000 per person, while costs for average $921,000, with co-occurring conditions driving totals higher through integrated medical, educational, and residential demands. Annual global burdens for childhood disabilities, including multiples, range from $450 to $69,500 per case, encompassing family out-of-pocket expenses, health system strains, and productivity losses. Public policy frameworks amplify these costs via reliance on government-funded programs, particularly , which covers over 3 million individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD)—many involving multiple impairments—and incurs per-enrollee annual spending of $51,000 to $70,000 for adults with disabilities, 2 to 5 times the average for non-disabled beneficiaries. (SSI) payments for beneficiaries with intellectual disabilities average $684 monthly, lower than the $938 for those with other disabilities, reflecting policy designs that allocate benefits based on condition type rather than holistic multiple-disability impacts. These programs, while essential, result in fragmented supports, with long-term services and supports (LTSS) accounting for over $100 billion annually nationwide, a portion directed toward the escalating demands from aging caregivers of adults with IDD and multiples. Indirect costs manifest in societal gaps and reductions, with disability-affected families facing 15 to 70 percent lower depending on impairment severity, perpetuating and straining fiscal resources. Extra living expenses for individuals with disabilities—covering aides, adaptive technologies, and transportation—further burden families and public assistance systems, as current provide in-kind benefits that remain disjointed and insufficient for multifaceted needs. In familial cases of , lifetime societal costs reach about AUD 7 million per person or AUD 10.8 million per , underscoring the intergenerational fiscal load from inadequate preventive or efficiency-focused interventions.

Key Legislation and Rights

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), adopted on December 13, 2006, and entered into force on May 3, 2008, establishes a comprehensive international framework for protecting the rights of persons with disabilities, including those with multiple or concomitant impairments. It mandates states parties to ensure equal enjoyment of , prohibiting and requiring reasonable accommodations, , and inclusion in , , , and . As of 2023, 185 countries have ratified the CRPD, obligating them to eliminate barriers and provide support services tailored to complex needs arising from multiple disabilities, such as combined sensory, intellectual, and physical impairments. In educational contexts, multiple disabilities are legally defined as concomitant impairments—such as combined with blindness or orthopedic impairment—the combination of which causes such severe educational needs that they cannot be addressed through programs designed for a single alone. This excludes deaf-blindness as a standalone category. Rights under such definitions emphasize (FAPE) in the , with individualized education programs (IEPs) mandating specialized instruction, , and related services like . In the United States, the , originally enacted in 1975 and reauthorized in 2004, entitles children aged 3-21 with multiple disabilities to federal funding-supported services, covering approximately 2% of students in this category as of 2022-2023 data. Complementing this, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities, including multiple ones, in employment, public accommodations, transportation, and , requiring employers and entities to provide reasonable modifications unless they impose undue hardship. Section 504 of the further bars discrimination in federally funded programs, ensuring auxiliary aids and services for access. These laws collectively affirm rights to non-discrimination, equal opportunity, and community participation, but implementation varies; for instance, CRPD monitoring reports highlight gaps in resource allocation for multiple disabilities in low-income countries, while U.S. enforcement through the Department of Justice has addressed over 25,000 ADA complaints annually in recent years, though outcomes depend on verifiable need and accommodation feasibility. Empirical evaluations, such as those from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, indicate that while IDEA has increased inclusion rates to 64% for students with multiple disabilities by 2020, persistent challenges include underfunding and inconsistent inter-agency coordination for adult transitions.

Critiques of Accommodation Policies

Critiques of accommodation policies for individuals with multiple disabilities center on their empirical shortcomings, particularly in and employment, where mandates for and reasonable adjustments often prioritize ideological access over demonstrated effectiveness. Policies such as the (IDEA) in the United States, which emphasizes the (LRE), have driven widespread inclusive practices, yet analyses of decades of research reveal fundamentally flawed evidence supporting academic or functional benefits for students with significant disabilities, including those with co-occurring intellectual, physical, and sensory impairments. A 2025 review by education scholars Douglas Fuchs and colleagues, examining over 50 years of studies, found persistent failures to control for , prior achievement, and disability severity, with reliable meta-analyses (e.g., Campbell Collaboration's 2022 assessment of 2,000+ studies, yielding only 15 high-quality ones) showing no consistent academic gains from general placements. For students with multiple or profound disabilities, inclusive accommodations—such as modified curricula or support in classrooms—frequently fail to deliver intensive, specialized instruction essential for progress, leading to stagnant outcomes. Evidence indicates these students, comprising about 1% of the disabled population with needs like profound combined with mobility limitations, achieve superior learning in separate settings tailored to their requirements, as general classrooms lack the structure for individualized, repetitive skill-building. Longitudinal data, including the 1991 National Longitudinal Transition Study adjusted for severity, confirm no post-school advantages from , while specialized environments correlate with better and metrics. Critics argue that full-inclusion mandates, influenced by interpretations of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Article 24), risk eroding effective systems without evidentiary backing, as seen in policies phasing out segregated classes despite superior outcomes in controlled studies (e.g., Hanushek et al., 2002). Such policies also impose externalities on non-disabled peers and educators. Inclusion of students with multiple disabilities, particularly those involving emotional or behavioral components, has been linked to reduced academic performance among general students—e.g., 0.09 standard deviation drops in math and 0.13 in reading—along with elevated (1.42 times higher with peers exhibiting severe behaviors). Teachers report diminished instructional time due to heightened demands, contributing to elevated turnover rates (up to 2.15% higher in high-inclusion settings lacking certification). In employment contexts under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), accommodations for severe multiple disabilities—such as extensive modifications for cognitive and physical limitations—often constitute undue hardship, with limited evidence of sustained job retention or productivity gains, as aggregate rates for profoundly disabled individuals remain below 20% despite three decades of mandates. Overall, these critiques highlight a disconnect between intent and causal outcomes, advocating for placements guided by needs rather than presumptive .

Recent Research and Future Directions

Emerging Therapies and Technologies

approaches targeting genetic underpinnings of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), which frequently co-occur with physical impairments in multiple disabilities, have advanced through (AAV) vectors to deliver functional genes to affected neurons. For instance, strategies aim to restore protein function in conditions like those involving MECP2 mutations, where dosage sensitivity complicates overexpression risks, though no approved treatments exist as of 2024. Early interventions emphasize timing, as postnatal delivery yields variable outcomes compared to prenatal models, with preclinical data showing improved cognition and motor function in mouse models of . Challenges include precise targeting and immune responses, limiting scalability for multifaceted disabilities. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) represent a non-invasive or implantable enabling individuals with severe motor, sensory, and cognitive impairments to control devices via neural signals, bypassing peripheral limitations. In clinical trials as of 2024, BCIs have and robotic limb operation for those with locked-in states or multiple impairments, translating activity into commands with accuracies exceeding 70% in some paradigms. Implantable systems, such as those tested in 2025 trials, allow speech decoding for non-verbal users, potentially addressing combined communication and mobility deficits. However, non-invasive BCIs face signal noise issues in pediatric or cognitively impaired populations, requiring hybrid assistive integrations for reliability. AI-enhanced assistive devices tailored for multiple disabilities include webcam-based systems that detect subtle responses, such as hand-object , to trigger environmental controls or educational content delivery. A 2025 study demonstrated this technology's efficacy in computer for participants with profound impairments, reducing dependency on precise motor skills. Adaptive smart wheelchairs and AI-driven , incorporating voice, gesture, and predictive algorithms, further support autonomy by compensating for co-occurring physical and intellectual challenges, with prototypes showing 20-30% efficiency gains in daily tasks as of 2025. Integration with exoskeletons for mobility augmentation remains experimental, prioritizing safety in users with sensory comorbidities. These technologies underscore causal links between input processing and improved functional outcomes, though long-term data on generalization across profiles is pending.

Gaps in Current Knowledge

Despite advances in disability research, the of many cases of multiple disabilities remains poorly understood, with no identifiable cause in a substantial proportion of instances. Genetic, prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal factors contribute variably, but interactions among these are underexplored, particularly for co-occurring and sensory impairments. Evidence on intervention effectiveness is fragmented, with systematic reviews identifying sparse high-quality studies evaluating multifaceted approaches for community participation or daily functioning in adults with multiple disabilities. For children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities, targeted therapies lack robust data on long-term efficacy due to small sample sizes and methodological inconsistencies. Communication interventions for severe cases show preliminary promise but suffer from limited replication across diverse etiologies. Longitudinal studies tracking outcomes like functional or trajectories are scarce, especially for underrepresented groups including racial minorities and those with intersecting disabilities. Retention challenges in such exacerbate gaps in understanding aging-related declines, with older adults facing unquantified risks from shortages and . Comorbidity research lags, particularly for dual diagnoses like intellectual disabilities with cancer or , where diagnostic overshadowing and barriers hinder prevalence estimates and tailored protocols. disparities persist, evidenced by lower satisfaction and preventive service uptake among those with multiple disabilities, amplified by events like the . Broader gaps encompass , , and living arrangements, where intersectional analyses reveal persistent inequities without causal mechanisms fully delineated.

References

  1. [1]
    Common Education Data Standards (CEDS)
    Multiple disabilities means concomitant impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness or intellectual disability-orthopedic impairment), the ...
  2. [2]
    [PDF] Multiple Disabilities - ERIC
    A key part of the definition is that the combination of disabilities causes the student to have severe educational needs.
  3. [3]
    COE - Students With Disabilities
    If a child is receiving services for more than one type of IDEA-defined disability, then the child is categorized under “multiple disabilities.” A specific ...
  4. [4]
    Multiple Disabilities - Project IDEAL
    The U.S. Department of Education reports 5,971,495 students receiving special education services in the 2003-2004 school year. Of that number, roughly 2.2%, or ...
  5. [5]
    Health problems in children with profound intellectual and multiple ...
    Dec 6, 2024 · This study aims to investigate and categorize health problems in children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD).
  6. [6]
    Evidence-Based Practices for Teaching Learners with Multiple Disabilities
    ### Summary of Evidence-Based Practices for Teaching Learners with Multiple Disabilities
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Multiple Disabilities Best Practices 2022
    IEP Teams should keep in mind that Multiple Disabilities is a low incidence disability, representing approximately 2% of all students within special education ( ...
  8. [8]
    Multiple developmental disabilities among American children
    Sep 24, 2024 · Prevalence of multiple developmental disabilities increased from 9.8% in 2016 to 11.5% in 2022 (P = 0.014) with significantly higher prevalence ...
  9. [9]
    34 CFR § 300.8 - Child with a disability. - Law.Cornell.Edu
    (7) Multiple disabilities means concomitant impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness or intellectual disability-orthopedic impairment), the ...
  10. [10]
    Multiple Disabilities - Center for Parent Information and Resources
    Many combinations of disabilities are possible. For example, one child with multiple disabilities may have an intellectual disability and deafness. Another ...
  11. [11]
    Multiple Disabilities | Ohio Department of Education and Workforce
    Dec 6, 2023 · “Multiple disabilities” means concomitant [simultaneous] impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness, intellectual disability-orthopedic impairment, ...
  12. [12]
    Multiple Disabilities | Utah Parent Center
    Often, individuals with multiple disabilities require ongoing, extensive support in more than one major life activity in order to enjoy the quality of life ...
  13. [13]
    Understanding "Multiple Disabilities" | A Guide to the IDEA
    In other words, a student whose special needs are categorized under multiple disabilities requires coinciding adaptions for more than one disability. The ...
  14. [14]
    Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities | OHCHR
    States Parties reaffirm that persons with disabilities have the right to recognition everywhere as persons before the law. States Parties shall recognize that ...
  15. [15]
    Persons with disabilities - European Commission
    Definition. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities defines persons with disabilities as 'those who have long-term physical, mental ...
  16. [16]
    MULTIPLE DISABILITIES - Legal Framework
    Multiple disabilities means impairments occurring at the same time (such as intellectual disabilities-blindness or intellectual disabilities-orthopedic ...
  17. [17]
    The 13 disability categories under IDEA
    Apr 9, 2024 · 8. Multiple disabilities ... Many kids have more than one disability, such as ADHD and autism. But this category is only used when the combination ...
  18. [18]
    Neurological and neurodevelopmental manifestations in children ...
    Down syndrome (DS) is the most common genetically acquired cause of intellectual disability (ID) with an estimated prevalence of 1 in 700 live births in the ...
  19. [19]
    Health comorbidities and cognitive abilities across the lifespan ... - NIH
    Jan 23, 2020 · Down syndrome (DS) is associated with variable intellectual disability and multiple health and psychiatric comorbidities.
  20. [20]
    Genetics, Chromosome Abnormalities - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf
    Apr 24, 2023 · A chromosomal abnormality, or chromosomal aberration, is a disorder characterized by a morphological or numerical alteration in single or multiple chromosomes.
  21. [21]
    About Fragile X Syndrome - CDC
    May 15, 2024 · Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is a genetic disorder and one of the most common causes of inherited intellectual disability.Missing: multiple impairments
  22. [22]
    FMR1 Disorders - GeneReviews® - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
    May 16, 2024 · Fragile X syndrome occurs in individuals with an FMR1 full mutation or other loss-of-function variant and is nearly always characterized in ...
  23. [23]
    The genetics of intellectual disability: advancing technology and ...
    Jan 16, 2020 · Genetic factors play a key role causing the congenital limitations in intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior.
  24. [24]
    Overview on Neural tube defects: from development to physical ...
    Neural tube defects (NTDs) are the second most common congenital malformations in humans affecting the development of the central nervous system.
  25. [25]
    5.3 Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) - CDC Archive
    Nov 27, 2020 · ... impairment and learning difficulties. CMV is the most common infectious cause of sensorineural hearing loss and neurodevelopmental ...
  26. [26]
    CMV | NCHAM
    When a baby is born with CMV infection, it is called congenital CMV (cCMV). cCMV infection can result in multiple disabilities in the baby such as hearing loss, ...
  27. [27]
    Congenital disorders - World Health Organization (WHO)
    Feb 27, 2023 · A minority of congenital disorders are caused by genetic abnormalities i.e. chromosomal abnormalities (for example Down syndrome or trisomy 21) ...
  28. [28]
    Facts About TBI | Traumatic Brain Injury & Concussion - CDC
    Aug 4, 2025 · TBI is a major cause of death and disability. TBIs may be missed in older adults. A TBI may lead to short- or long-term health problems. A TBI ...
  29. [29]
    Long-Term Effects of Traumatic Brain Injury | University of Utah Health
    Feb 20, 2025 · One in 60 people in the US lives with a traumatic brain injury related disability. Learn how a traumatic brain injury can have life-lasting ...
  30. [30]
    What Disabilities Can Result From a TBI? - Brainline.org
    May 17, 2013 · Disabilities resulting from a TBI depend upon the severity of the injury, the location of the injury, and the age and general health of the ...
  31. [31]
    Information and Resources for Students with Multiple Disabilities
    Multiple disabilities can also be caused by infections (meningitis, rubella, herpes, etc.) or exposure to environmental toxins (Rosenberg, Westling, & McLeskey, ...
  32. [32]
    Childhood infections and autism spectrum disorders and/or ...
    Feb 13, 2022 · Infections that can invade the fetal and neonatal brain are established causes of life-long behavioral and intellectual disabilities [14, 15]. ...
  33. [33]
    Prevalence of Disability Associated With Head Injury With Loss ... - NIH
    Overall, participants with a history of head injury had higher prevalence of disability in at least 1 domain of functioning compared to individuals without head ...
  34. [34]
    Disability - World Health Organization (WHO)
    Mar 7, 2023 · An estimated 1.3 billion people experience significant disability. This represents 16% of the world's population, or 1 in 6 of us.
  35. [35]
    Nearly 240 million children with disabilities around the world ...
    Nov 9, 2021 · The number of children with disabilities globally is estimated at almost 240 million, according to a new UNICEF report.
  36. [36]
    Adults with One or More Functional Disabilities - CDC
    Sep 30, 2016 · Although the rank order of specific disability types varied by number of disabilities, among adults with multiple disabilities, difficulties in ...
  37. [37]
    UK disability statistics: Prevalence and life experiences
    Oct 2, 2024 · An estimated 16.1 million people in the UK had a disability in 2022/23, accounting for 24% of the total population.Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  38. [38]
    Population with disability - Statistics Explained - Eurostat
    Nearly a quarter (23.9%) of people aged 16 years or over in the EU had a disability (activity limitation) in 2024. In 2024, males in the EU were less likely ...Missing: UK | Show results with:UK
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Financial Inequality: Disability, Race and Poverty in America
    African Americans are the most likely to have a disability (14 percent) followed by Non-Hispanic Whites (11 percent), Latinos (8 percent) and Asians (5 percent ...
  40. [40]
    Racial and ethnic disparities in the co-occurrence of intellectual ...
    Feb 28, 2024 · Intellectual disability (ID) commonly co-occurs in children with autism. Although diagnostic criteria for ID require impairments in both ...
  41. [41]
    Multiple developmental disabilities among American children
    Prevalence of multiple developmental disabilities increased from 9.8% in 2016 to 11.5% in 2022 (P = 0.014) with significantly higher prevalence during COVID-19 ...
  42. [42]
    Socioeconomic Factors at the Intersection of Race and Ethnicity ...
    A pattern of increasing disability by age was evident across all racial/ethnic groups (overall 13.0 % among 18–44 year olds, 26.2 % among 45–64 year olds, and ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Global report on children with developmental disabilities | UNICEF
    In 2019, there were approximately 317 million children and adolescents with health conditions that contribute to developmental disabilities globally. But across ...
  44. [44]
    Intersectional inequalities: How socioeconomic well-being varies at ...
    Disability emerges as the strongest stratifying category, with wide variation in estimated poverty at the intersection of disability, race-ethnicity, gender, ...
  45. [45]
    Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Disability Prevalence - PMC - NIH
    There were statistically significant racial/ethnic differences in disability status; 10.2 % non-Hispanic whites, 14.8 % non-Hispanic African Americans, 8.1 % ...
  46. [46]
    Intellectual Disability - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
    Individuals with an intellectual disability have neurodevelopmental deficits characterized by limitations in intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior.
  47. [47]
    What is Intellectual Disability? - Psychiatry.org
    Intellectual disability affects about 1% of the population, and of those about 85% have mild intellectual disability. In high-income countries, 2–3% of children ...Search · Diagnosing Intellectual... · Management<|separator|>
  48. [48]
    Clinical Characteristics of Intellectual Disabilities - NCBI - NIH
    Intellectual disability is characterized by deficits in reasoning, problem-solving, and adaptive skills, with an IQ below 70, and difficulties in conceptual, ...
  49. [49]
    Intellectual & Cognitive Disability - Riley Children's Health
    Children with intellectual disabilities are limited in how much they are able to learn or function. These children have a very low intelligence quotient (IQ) ...
  50. [50]
    Supporting Young Children With Multiple Disabilities: What Do We ...
    Feb 24, 2014 · Young children with multiple disabilities have unique needs and challenges. Many of these young children struggle to communicate their wants and needs.
  51. [51]
    Diagnosed Developmental Disabilities in Children Aged 3–17 Years
    Jul 13, 2023 · During 2019–2021, the prevalence of any diagnosed developmental disability in children aged 3–17 years increased from 7.40% to 8.56%. The ...
  52. [52]
    Inventory of assessment practices in people with profound ...
    Knowledge about the quality of assessment methods used in the support of people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) is scarce.
  53. [53]
    Prevalence of visual impairment in adults with intellectual disabilities ...
    Prevalences of visual impairment ranged from 2.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.5-6.4) in young adults with mild ID and no Down's syndrome to 66.7% (95% CI, ...
  54. [54]
    Sensory impairment and intellectual disability
    Jan 2, 2018 · The prevalence of sensory impairment (visual and hearing) is much greater in adults with intellectual disability than in the general population.Sensory Impairment... · Assessment · Management Strategies<|control11|><|separator|>
  55. [55]
    Prevalence of hearing loss in 1598 adults with an intellectual disability
    Jul 7, 2009 · The re-weighted prevalence of hearing loss was 30.3% (95% CI: 27.7–33.0%) in the representative base population of 9012 adults with an ID.
  56. [56]
    Chronic Health Conditions Among Adults With Intellectual and ...
    Sep 1, 2024 · Results indicate high prevalence of asthma, diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension. Heart disease rates were particularly high, having been ...
  57. [57]
    Multimorbidity in older adults with intellectual disabilities
    Multimorbidity is prevalent in 80% of the older adults with ID. · Multimorbidity is associated with age and severity of intellectual disability. · Having ≥4 ...
  58. [58]
    Epilepsy in adults with neurodevelopmental disability ‐ what every ...
    Feb 15, 2022 · These conditions included GI disorders (34.7%), sleep disorders (17.6%), dyslipidaemia (22.8%), hypertension (25.6%), diabetes (7.6 ...
  59. [59]
    Prevalence and patterns of comorbidities in people with disabilities ...
    Jan 16, 2024 · Other commonest forms of morbidities were heart problems (17.1%), diabetes (9.1%), asthma (9.0%), and epilepsy (3.9%). Table 2 Patterns of ...Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  60. [60]
    [PDF] American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
    The incidence of hospital admissions among people with disabilities almost triples that of people without a disability, and in a model adjusting for comorbidity ...<|separator|>
  61. [61]
    CALPADS Primary Disability Category Codes
    Multiple Disabilities means concomitant impairments (such as intellectual disability-blindness, intellectual disability-orthopedic impairment, etc.,) the ...
  62. [62]
    Disability Condition Eligibility Definitions | Texas SPED Support
    Multiple Disabilities · (I) psychomotor skills; · (II) self-care skills; · (III) communication; · (IV) social and emotional development; or · (V) cognition.
  63. [63]
    Tips for Assessing Children with Multiple Disabilities
    Mar 21, 2018 · Select appropriate assessment tools – Look for tools that include info about how to adapt assessment items for children with sensory or motor ...
  64. [64]
    (DASH-3) Development Assessment for Severely Disabled - WPS
    In stockDASH-3 Development Assessment for Severely Disabled measures specific skills in individuals with disabilities. For ages 6 months through adulthood.
  65. [65]
    Developmental Assessment for Individuals with Severe Disabilities
    It can be used to develop educational and therapeutic intervention plans, such as Individual Education Plan (IEPs) and Individual Family Support Plans (IFSPs).
  66. [66]
    [PDF] Modified L.A.U.S.D. O&M Assessment for Blind, Low Vision and ...
    This tool is a comprehensive assessment designed to be used by trained Orientation and Mobility (O&M). Specialists in order to determine whether or not an ...
  67. [67]
    IDEA: Sec. 300.8 – Child with a Disability - gov.ed.sites
    No information is available for this page. · Learn why<|control11|><|separator|>
  68. [68]
    The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: A Comparison of ...
    Oct 12, 2020 · Subsequent U.S. Department of Education (ED) regulations list two additional disability categories: "deaf-blindness" and "multiple disabilities.Missing: prevalence | Show results with:prevalence
  69. [69]
    Autism in children with multiple, severe disabilities – Beyond the WISC
    It is likely that both under and over diagnosis of autism is common in children with severe disabilities. ... multiple disabilities. Thus, these tests must ...
  70. [70]
    Educational Programming for Deaf Children with Multiple Disabilities
    Oct 26, 2015 · Educational Programming for Deaf Children with Multiple Disabilities ... over-diagnosis clearly is. 13. a problem, among other factors due to a ...
  71. [71]
    Doctor who broadened autism spectrum 'sorry' for over-diagnosis
    Apr 24, 2023 · “Although people often benefit from an accurate diagnosis of autism, an inaccurate diagnosis can cause harmful stigma, hopelessness, reduced ...
  72. [72]
    Why having too many or too few special education students matters
    Jun 1, 2021 · With a predicted rise in the number of special education referrals, schools should have tiered supports in place and monitor for inappropriate identifications.
  73. [73]
    [PDF] Autism spectrum disorder in people with multiple disabilities
    Educational programming for deaf children with multiple disabilities: ... disabilities, so that over-diagnosis of ASD is prevented and treatment can ...
  74. [74]
    Inclusive Education, Intellectual Disabilities and the Demise of Full ...
    This article presents a discussion that focuses on theory, practice and research relevant to inclusive education for students with intellectual disabilities.
  75. [75]
  76. [76]
    Reframing the Most Important Special Education Policy Debate in 50 ...
    Feb 10, 2025 · Following their meta-analysis of the efficacy studies, Carlberg and Kavale (1980) reported a small negative effect for special class instruction ...
  77. [77]
    Top scholar says evidence for special education inclusion is ...
    Jan 13, 2025 · Analysis of 50 years of research argues that there isn't strong evidence for the academic advantages of placing children with disabilities in general education ...
  78. [78]
  79. [79]
    Fast Facts: Students with disabilities, inclusion of (59)
    In 2022, 95% of students with disabilities were in regular schools, with 67% spending 80% or more of their time in general classes. More than two-thirds of  ...Missing: studies | Show results with:studies
  80. [80]
    [PDF] Evidence-Based Practices for Students With Severe Disabilities
    Recent literature reviews documented a strong evidence base for using systematic instruction to teach academic skills to this population (Browder, Ahlgrim- ...
  81. [81]
    Supporting students with disability to improve academic, social and ...
    The findings of this umbrella review indicate that visual and video supports, peer-mediated instruction and intervention, systematic instruction, self- ...
  82. [82]
    Residential Transitions among Adults with Intellectual Disability ...
    The present study addresses critical gaps in the literature by examining residential transitions among 303 adults with intellectual disability over 10 years.
  83. [83]
    Community Living, Intellectual Disability and Extensive Support Needs
    Mar 19, 2021 · Thus, 16,591 people with extensive support needs continue to live in institutions and the support they receive is mainly focused on residential ...
  84. [84]
    [PDF] Barriers to Employment Participation of Individuals With Disabilities
    Barriers include employer misperceptions, perceived cost, and perceived mismatch of skills to job qualifications, with a disconnect between employer ...
  85. [85]
    [PDF] American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
    Our practical goal was to compile a comprehensive listing of barriers that might hinder access to integrated employment, while also identifying those categories ...
  86. [86]
    [PDF] Persons with a Disability: Labor Force Characteristics - 2024
    Feb 25, 2025 · In 2024, the employment rate for those with a disability was 22.7% with a 7.5% unemployment rate, compared to 65.5% and 3.8% for those without. ...
  87. [87]
    Barriers to employment for people with a disability
    Jul 29, 2020 · Other barriers included lack of education or training (12.2 percent), lack of transportation (10.6 percent), and the need for special features ...Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  88. [88]
    The Employment of Persons with a Disability and/or Neurodiversity
    May 22, 2023 · Other barriers reported included the lack of education or training (13.1%), the need for special features at the job (12.5%), the lack of ...
  89. [89]
    Individual Placement and Support (IPS) - A Supported Employment ...
    Jan 16, 2025 · The IPS model of Supported Employment is grounded in research showing the transformative power of employment as a path to recovery.
  90. [90]
    How do supported employment programs work? Answers from ... - NIH
    Feb 27, 2022 · Many studies have found that supported employment (SE) has effectively helped people with severe mental illness obtain and maintain competitive employment.
  91. [91]
    [PDF] Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities - AAIDD
    Supported Employment (SE) offers evidence-based vocational rehabilitation with personalized workplace support for CIE success. This study aims to predict CIE ...
  92. [92]
    Implementing Supported Employmentas an Evidence-Based Practice
    Supported employment is a well-defined approach to helping people with disabilities participate as much as possible in the competitive labor market, working in ...
  93. [93]
    Supported Employment | Georgia Vocational Rehabilitation Agency
    GVRA offers three Supported Employment (SE) programs: Traditional SE, Customized SE, and IPS (Individual Placement & Supports).
  94. [94]
    Hire Our Workforce - The Rock Creek Foundation
    The innovative and highly effective Supported Employment Program allows individuals with mental illnesses, developmental disabilities, and single and multiple ...
  95. [95]
    The Economic Costs of Childhood Disability: A Literature Review - NIH
    Annual burden of childhood disability ranged ≈$450–69,500 worldwide. Childhood disability imposes a heavy economic burden on families, health systems, and ...
  96. [96]
    Financial and Psychological Stressors Associated with Caring for ...
    Children with disability were twice as likely to reside with caregivers with high levels of financial stress and almost three and half times as likely to reside ...
  97. [97]
    Health Care Cost Concerns and Hardships for Families of Children ...
    Apr 24, 2025 · Families of children with disabilities were almost twice as likely to experience any of 6 financial hardships than families of children without ...
  98. [98]
    Quality of Life and Burden of Caregiving Among the Primary ...
    Aug 27, 2021 · Almost two thirds of the caregivers have some burden of caregiving. The mean burden scores were significantly different between the disability ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  99. [99]
    A valuable burden? The impact of children with profound intellectual ...
    Jul 5, 2017 · Parents and families. A valuable burden? The impact of children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities on family life. Jorien ...
  100. [100]
    Physical and Mental Health Effects of Family Caregiving - PMC - NIH
    Physical health. Factors linked to caregiver's physical health include the care recipient's behavior problems, cognitive impairment, and functional disabilities ...
  101. [101]
    The Physical Health of Caregivers of Children With Life-Limiting ...
    Aug 1, 2021 · Authors conclude it seems likely that caring for a child with a disability is associated with negative effects on the physical health of the ...
  102. [102]
    a cross-sectional study of caregiver burden among those caring for ...
    Aug 3, 2025 · Lower family income and non-attendance of children in school were significantly associated with higher caregiver burden (p=0.04 and 0.02, ...
  103. [103]
    Economic Costs Associated with Mental Retardation, Cerebral Palsy ...
    Average lifetime costs per person were estimated at $1,014,000 for persons with mental retardation, $921,000 for persons with cerebral palsy, $417,000 for ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  104. [104]
    5 Key Facts About Medicaid Coverage for People With Intellectual ...
    Sep 22, 2025 · Among the estimated 8 million people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD), over three million have Medicaid coverage.Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  105. [105]
    Medicaid: Characteristics of and Expenditures for Adults with ...
    Apr 24, 2023 · The average amount that Medicaid paid for such beneficiaries ranged from $51,000 to $70,000. This is 2 to 5 times higher than the average for ...Missing: lifetime multiple
  106. [106]
    Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability ...
    On average, beneficiaries with ID received $684 per month, much less than the average amount received by those with other disabilities ($938 per month; Table 10) ...Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  107. [107]
    Later-Life Household Wealth Before and After Disability Onset | ASPE
    Jul 31, 2016 · Although exact estimates vary, Medicaid currently pays more than $100 billion a year for LTSS, covering 40-60 percent of the nation's LTSS costs ...Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  108. [108]
    Supporting Adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities ...
    Increases in the number of people with I/DD living at home with aging caregivers will also increase demand for state- and federally- funded services, primarily ...Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  109. [109]
    The Fed - The Hidden Costs of Disability - Federal Reserve Board
    Jan 10, 2025 · The earnings penalty for households with disabilities is estimated to range from 15 to 70 percent of earnings, depending on the nature of the disability.
  110. [110]
    [PDF] The Extra Costs of Living with a Disability in the U.S. — Resetting ...
    Research indicating the substantial extra costs that people with disabilities face suggests more work is needed to further the goals of the ADA. This will ...
  111. [111]
    Extra costs of living with a disability: A review and agenda for research
    Direct costs associated with disability are wide-ranging including additional out of pocket costs required for health services, medication, help with daily ...
  112. [112]
    The Healthcare and Societal Costs of Familial Intellectual Disability
    The lifetime cost of familial intellectual disability is approximately AUD 7 million per person and AUD 10.8 million per household.
  113. [113]
  114. [114]
    Multiple disabilities - gov.ed.sites
    No information is available for this page. · Learn why
  115. [115]
    The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part B
    Aug 20, 2024 · IDEA provides federal funding for the education of children with disabilities and imposes certain conditions for the receipt of federal funds.
  116. [116]
    Guide to Disability Rights Laws - ADA.gov
    A brief overview of ten Federal laws that protect the rights of people with disabilities and the Federal agencies to contact for more information.
  117. [117]
    Has Inclusion Gone Too Far? - Education Next
    Jul 24, 2018 · Unfortunately, research has yielded only weak evidence that inclusion confers benefits on SWDs. Studies that report better academic and ...
  118. [118]
    The Effects of the ADA - U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
    Currently, there are a number of tax incentives available to help employers cover the cost of accommodations for employees with disabilities and to make their ...
  119. [119]
    Gene-replacement therapy in neurodevelopmental disorders - JCI
    Feb 3, 2025 · Gene-replacement strategies involving adeno-associated viruses (AAV) require the delivery of genes to specific types of neurons or areas in the brain.Abstract · Optimizing gene replacement · The importance of timing · ConclusionsMissing: physical | Show results with:physical
  120. [120]
    MECP2-related disorders while gene-based therapies are on the ...
    Feb 11, 2024 · There are currently no gene-based therapy treatments approved for use in MECP2-related disorders. One challenge is that MECP2 is a dose- ...
  121. [121]
    Intellectual disability: A potentially treatable condition - Donoghue
    Jun 17, 2024 · In this article, we discuss the treatment strategies that may be possible to change the neurodevelopmental outcome in a broader range of genetic ...Abstract · Phenylketonuria: Successful... · MPSII – Limitations of Enzyme...
  122. [122]
    Recent advances in gene therapy for neurodevelopmental disorders ...
    Gene therapy seeks to alleviate diseases by introducing genetic material into target cells to restore physiological functions. For most NDD + E disorders the ...
  123. [123]
    A Brain–Computer Interface System for Severe Disability Support
    Oct 21, 2024 · The proposed BCI system significantly improves the ability of individuals with severe disabilities to interact with various applications and ...
  124. [124]
    Brain-Computer Interfaces: Applications, Challenges, and Policy ...
    Dec 17, 2024 · In clinical trials, BCIs have helped people with severe disabilities communicate and use robotic limbs, though these BCIs are not yet on the ...Missing: multiple | Show results with:multiple
  125. [125]
    Brain computer interfaces are poised to help people with disabilities
    Jun 30, 2025 · People who have lost the ability to move or speak may soon have a new option: surgically implanted devices that link the brain to a computer.
  126. [126]
    Challenges of brain-computer interface facilitated cognitive ...
    Sep 20, 2022 · Here we discuss the challenges of using non-invasive BCI with children, especially children who do not have another established method of communication with ...
  127. [127]
    A Technology System to Help People With Multiple Disabilities ... - NIH
    Mar 21, 2025 · This study assessed a new technology system using a webcam to detect participants' responses (ie, hand contact with objects) and to trigger computer delivery ...
  128. [128]
    Exciting Assistive Technology for People with Disabilities (And How ...
    Aug 1, 2025 · Explore the latest in assistive technology for people with disabilities, from AI-driven smart homes to adaptive bikes and smart wheelchairs, ...
  129. [129]
    How Technology Can Enhance the Lives of People with Disabilities
    Oct 11, 2024 · Mobility Solutions. Enhancements for Visual Impairment. Advancements for Hearing Impairment. Support for Cognitive and Learning Disabilities.
  130. [130]
    Multiple Disabilities – Understanding and Supporting Learners with ...
    A self-management-skills approach has been an effective strategy for students with developmental disabilities like autism to learn a variety of skills (e.g., ...How To Teach Students With... · What To Teach · How To Support Students With...<|control11|><|separator|>
  131. [131]
    Multiple Disabilities | Characteristics, Prevalence & Causes - Lesson
    Multiple disabilities account for around 1.2% of children in the US, based on 2019 data.Multiple Disabilities · Prevalence of Multiple... · Multiple Disabilities Causes<|separator|>
  132. [132]
    Evidence and gap map of studies assessing the effectiveness of ...
    The aim of this EGM is to identify, map and describe existing evidence of effectiveness studies and highlight gaps in evidence base for people with ...
  133. [133]
    Multifaceted interventions for supporting community participation ...
    This review examines multifaceted interventions that measure outcomes relevant to community participation for adults with disabilities.
  134. [134]
    Children with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities Face ...
    Jan 27, 2025 · Children with PIMD are non-ambulatory and require intensive support for daily living. They also frequently experience sensory impairments and a ...
  135. [135]
    Full article: Following children with severe or profound intellectual ...
    Abstract. There is limited research targeting communication interventions for children with severe/profound intellectual and multiple disabilities.Missing: etiology | Show results with:etiology<|separator|>
  136. [136]
    Improving Retention of Diverse Samples in Longitudinal Research ...
    Developmental disabilities (DD) research has depended on volunteer and clinical samples, with limited racial/ethnic diversity.
  137. [137]
    Gaps in research and services persist for Americans with disabilities ...
    Sep 27, 2022 · The report adds that older adults face challenges to community living because of caregiver shortages, social isolation, and limited access to technology.
  138. [138]
    Assessment of Function and Disability in Longitudinal Studies - PMC
    Functional limitations are useful to assess because they are often strong predictors of clinically meaningful, distal outcomes, such as disability, nursing home ...
  139. [139]
    Breaking barriers: a commentary on research gaps in cancer and ...
    Jan 6, 2025 · This commentary outlines the challenges in researching individuals with intellectual disabilities who have a dual diagnosis of cancer and depression.
  140. [140]
    Researchers reveal health care gaps for persons with disabilities
    Mar 6, 2025 · Researchers also found that people with multiple disabilities had the lowest satisfaction levels and people with physical, cognitive and ...
  141. [141]
    Pandemic deepened health gaps for people with disabilities, study ...
    Jul 2, 2025 · Pandemic deepened health gaps for people with disabilities, study finds. Preventive heart screenings and routine care dropped significantly for ...
  142. [142]
    Intersections: exposing and closing disability research gaps
    Feb 1, 2024 · Articles will examine gaps in disability research focused on living arrangements, employment matters, social relationships, the direct support workforce,
  143. [143]
    Equity Gaps for Students with Disabilities
    We argue that every study of SWDs requires an intersectional lens based on the characteristics of students in the classrooms under investigation. Intersectional ...<|separator|>