Behavioural and developmental paediatrics

Published on 21/03/2015 by admin

Filed under Pediatrics

Last modified 22/04/2025

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 0 (0 votes)

This article have been viewed 1637 times

Chapter 5 Behavioural and developmental paediatrics

Long Cases

Anorexia nervosa

The eating disorders anorexia nervosa (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN) are potentially lethal conditions, and two of the leading bio-psychosocial developmental disorders amongst adolescents, particularly females, in countries with Western culture. They occur predominantly in countries where there is abundant food, where the ultimate sought-after physique is a slim one and where society is orientated to achievement. Eating disorders are about 10 times more common in females than males. AN affects around 0.5–1% of adolescent females in the USA, while BN affects around 1–5%.

AN involves an inability to maintain a body weight that is normal for the patient’s age and height, or failure to gain weight when growing, with fear of gaining weight and disturbed perception of body weight and/or shape, and endocrine complications of malnutrition such as amenorrhoea. There are two subtypes—the restrictive type alone, and the other type that includes bulimic behaviour or over-exercising (note that vomiting per se does not make a diagnosis of BN, and in the context of low weight and vomiting, the diagnosis of AN takes precedence).

The aims of this long-case section are as follows:

This long case deals exclusively with AN. The long case can be challenging, but offers a wide discussion base regarding management. As AN is the third most common chronic illness in adolescent girls in Australia, the UK and the USA, there are always long-term patients available in hospitals where examinations are held.

Background information

The eating disorders are developmental disorders that involve pathological solutions to developmental challenges. There is increasing evidence of a strong biological predisposition to anorexia nervosa. The eating disorders are psychiatric disorders, representing a common pathway for expressing developmental difficulties at certain ages. They are chronic and ego-syntonic conditions (i.e. patients do not see the behaviour as a disorder, but as part of their self), where the patient has distorted perceptions about food and body image that interfere with normal functioning and involve the establishment of a range of unhealthy behaviours. Although many texts have described disturbed parent–child relationships as often underpinning the development of eating disorders, current research does not support abnormal parent interactions as aetiological.

There is no single aetiology for eating disorders. It has been postulated that recurrent exposure to ‘ideally thin’ body images can lead to body dissatisfaction; this has yet to be proved. Twin and family studies suggest that AN heritability ranges between 50 and 83%. Linkage studies have identified loci for AN and for associated behavioural traits such as compulsivity. Around one third of genetic risk for AN and depression, anxiety disorders and addictive disorders is shared. For many adolescents, overall self-esteem is linked directly to body esteem.

Risk factors that create susceptibility for the development of eating disorders include:

The development of a sudden desire to eat more healthily, to become a vegetarian or to lose weight by dieting can in time become more extreme, with the development of disordered eating.

Dieting is a clear risk factor for onset of AN. The risk is greater the more extreme the dieting behaviours. However, because of the greater prevalence of moderate dieting, more cases of AN arise in moderate rather than extreme dieters.

Other risk factors include being involved in sports that place great emphasis on a particular body size and shape (e.g. ballet, gymnastics, athletics), or having type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus (T1DM)—a chronic illness that causes a significant life stress, involves special attention to diet, is associated with increased risk of depression and anxiety (which themselves are risk factors for AN), and involves challenges and stresses in the parent–child relationship.

Trigger factors may include adolescence itself, with its concomitant developmental strivings, identity definition and need for independence, or traumatic life events such as the recent loss of a loved family member or animal, a move to a new school, starting high school, a move to a new home, family disruption (marital discord, domestic violence, divorce), a fight with a close friend, or being picked on or bullied at school. It can also be triggered by less extreme issues, such as comments by a sports coach about being overweight.

Perpetuating factors include, most importantly, the biological effects of being underweight and undernourished (from sustained caloric malnutrition and self-starvation), which include the classic psychological responses of food obsession, depressed mood, food-related rumination and aberrant food-related behaviours.

Inadvertent positive reinforcement can occur if the patient was initially overweight, and the initial weight loss was greeted with support for dieting efforts. Parents’ accidental tacit agreement by complying with demands of the eating-disordered child (buying diet foods, allowing vigorous exercise schedules) can reinforce the evolving ‘anorexic identity’.

As these behaviours persist, becoming habitual, they evolve into a defence system against awareness, or resolution, of the causal developmental difficulties. The eating-disordered behaviours, or self-perpetuating compulsions, express the repressed thoughts of the affected adolescent, including fear of growing up (delay in growth and puberty, and amenorrhoea in AN, help this), negative feelings (anger, fear, loneliness, sadness, worry), desire for competition and achievement (using food restriction and controlling weight), feeling of control (refusing food despite hunger) and rebelliousness (refusing to eat despite insistence by family that they do so).

AN is very much a misnomer. These patients are not anorectic; they have normal appetites. They just exert their control, as mentioned above, by refusing to take notice of their (initially) ordered physiology. If a child or adolescent labelled as having AN does complain of anorexia, and does not have body image distortion, then that patient needs to be assessed for an organic problem such as inflammatory bowel disease or occult malignancy (for the differential diagnosis of AN, see the short-case approach to weight loss in Chapter 8, Gastroenterology).

History

Ideally, the history should be taken from the patient and the parent, but the logistics of an examination situation makes it prudent to take the history from one or the other predominantly; the history from the parent will (hopefully) not be as divorced from reality as that of the patient. The examiners need to know that the candidate appreciates the need to get the contrasting histories from both parties, in order to have a comprehensive overview of the dynamics of the patient and their family unit. The candidate also needs to appreciate that the patient can reliably inform the candidate about other aspects of his or her life, such as school, peer relationships and so on.

Current status

Behavioural symptoms: the A to F of AN

1. Activity: exercise (compulsive, at unusual hours, solitary, not part of competitive sport, prolonged duration, long-distance running, sit-ups or stomach crunches a favourite), constant movement, standing rather than sitting. Ask ‘How long do you exercise each day?’

2. Body image: negative comments (unhappy with thighs, abdomen, hips), frequent weighing of self, not happy with new lower weight, chooses baggy clothes to hide weight loss. Ask ‘What do you think about your weight? Are you average, skinny or overweight? What would be a healthy weight for you?’ Document how large the patient judges his or her body to be. Body checking: repeated weighing, pinching, measuring body parts, checking protrusion of particular bones, checking certain clothes fit, mirror gazing, comparison with others’ bodies. Body avoidance: the opposite to body checking, avoiding above, refusal to weigh, avoidance of mirrors. Minimising symptom severity. Shape concerns. Overvaluation of weight and shape in determining self-worth. Fear of weight gain. Disturbance in how their own body is experienced. Note that many young people choose not to share these concerns with a candidate because they are shameful emotions. Younger adolescents do not commonly express such concerns even to health professionals they know well.

3. Cognitive aspects: rigid thought processes, impaired judgement, obsessive thoughts, rigid beliefs (e.g. cannot eat this food with that food; cannot eat after specified time, such as 6 p.m., as will not digest food), ritualised behaviour associated with purchase, preparation and consumption of food.

4. Drug aspects: use of laxatives, diet pills, diuretics, stimulants, thyroxine, cigarette smoking, diabetic (T1DM) patients withholding insulin. Ask: ‘What [medicines] do you have?’

5. Eating behaviour: missing meals, eating very slowly (e.g. cuts peas in half), hiding food, feeding her or his food to pets, feigning eating (e.g. pushing food around plate), avoiding social events involving eating, self-induced vomiting after meals, spitting, prolonged fasting (over eight waking hours), strict rules about eating, avoidance of social eating, little variety in foods (extreme vegan diets, avoidance of fat), secret eating, cooking for others but not eating themslves.

6. Food intake: types of eating—restrictive (eating less), selective (limiting intake to a range of preferred foods), restrained (controlling type and amount of foods); refusal to eat foods perceived as fattening (e.g. meat, dairy products, fat, carbohydrates); high intake of water, diet drinks, vegetarian foods; claims ‘allergy’ to various foods; immediate guilt after eating (may induce vomiting, or exercise excessively).

Examination for anorexia nervosa

The approach given in Table 5.1 assesses patients with AN for disease severity and current status. It omits the various negative findings that would be relevant in a patient in whom the diagnosis was only suspected, but not yet proven. For the differential diagnosis for AN, see the short case on weight loss in Chapter 8 (Gastroenterology).

Table 5.1 Examination for anorexia nervosa

1. Introduce self
2. General inspection
   Parameters

   Percentiles

   Sick or well, cachectic, depressed affect, nasogastric tube 3. Demonstrate fat and protein stores    Subcutaneous fat: mid-arm, axillae, subscapular, suprailiac    Muscle bulk: biceps, triceps, quadriceps, glutei 4. Skin    Pallor, acrocyanosis    Yellowish hue (from hypercarotenaemia)    Petechiae—limited to SVC distribution (vomiting)    Dry, scaling    Dermatitis artefacta (e.g. cigarette-burns, other self-injury)    Excoriated acne    Hypertrichosis—lanugo-like, fine downy hair    Eczematous scaling around mouth, elbows, knees, genitals, anus (zinc deficiency) 5. Head and neck    Hair: loss of discrete areas (trichotillo-mania), thinning, brittle, pluckable    Eyes: conjunctival pallor (anaemias), cataract    Palate: scarring from self-induced vomiting    Teeth: erosion of enamel (purging)    Contour of lower face: prominent salivary glands (bulimic features) 6. Upper limbs    Hands: Russell’s sign (calluses, scars or erosions over dorsal surface of hands, especially metacarpophalangeal joints, with self-induced vomiting)    Nails: bitten, brittle    Pulse: bradycardia, irregular (atrial arrhythmia)    Blood pressure: hypotension—check for postural drop 7. Chest    Tachypnoea (metabolic acidosis)    Subcutaneous emphysema (with pneumomediastinum) 8. Abdomen    Scars (dermatitis artefacta), Tanner staging—pubertal delay 9. Lower limbs    Muscle bulk, pretibial oedema 10. Other    Urinalysis: high specific gravity (dehydration)    Temperature chart: hypothermia (PCM)

PCM = protein calorie malnutrition; SVC = superior vena cava.

Management

In this age of evidence-based medicine, AN remains a condition with significant morbidity (potential mortality), especially in adults with chronic disease, but in which until recently there has been little high-level evidence to support any particular form of intervention that could be said to approach a ‘gold standard’.

There are now large randomised controlled trials of Family Based Treatments (known as Maudsley Family Therapy) that demonstrate efficacy for adolescents less than 19 years old with a duration of illness of less than 3 years. Treatment is manualised, with 20 sessions over 12 months. Follow-up data over 5 years demonstrates the ongoing efficacy of this treatment.

Most management plans in the past have been based on opinions of experts, in the form of consensus guidelines. These suggest that early intervention (< 1 year since onset of symptoms) is more efficacious than later intervention; younger patients do better than older; requirement for hospitalisation is a negative prognostic sign; and involvement of the family is crucial.

Hospitalisation

Most patients with AN manage to avoid admission to hospital. A number of parameters are used to assess the need for hospitalisation. Those who are admitted for stabilisation ideally should be admitted to a specialised child and adolescent eating disorders unit, as found in most tertiary paediatric referral centres.

Indications for admission to hospital are as follows:

(mnemonic: POLICE WT, police weight)

Different interest groups have slightly different criteria for when to admit to hospital, and whether to admit under a medical team or psychiatric team, and then whether to admit as a voluntary or involuntary patient, depending on the Mental Health Act guidelines.

In general, the admission will be ‘medical’ if the BMI is under 12 (this is extremely low), or there are significant medical complications, such as heart rate under 50 bpm. Admission to psychiatric units is more common for psychiatric symptoms such as self-harming or suicidal ideation. Admission practices differ significantly between paediatric and adult units.

Medical stabilisation can take weeks. It is important to avoid the refeeding syndrome, which can be very dangerous; the four main nutrients affected are phosphate, magnesium, potassium and thiamine; these can all drop to dangerous levels during refeeding. Some units check phosphate, magnesium and potassium on a daily basis for the first week, and some give thiamine parenterally for the first 3 days, although this would only be for extreme cases. Generally, the plan is to restore the BMI to a target of about 75% ideal body weight (IBW) or BMI centile (this is a better measure in adolescence—e.g. 17 kg/m2 for a 12-year-old girl is >25th centile BMI; compared to a 17-year-old, where it is < 5th centile) before the patient is ready for outpatient treatment; this is achieved by restoring 1–2 kg/week, until the target weight is achieved and the young person is eating orally.

Most inpatient programs for AN involve a multidisciplinary team, which may include paediatricians, dieticians, nurses, paediatric psychiatrists and psychologists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, social workers, teachers and art/music therapists. The parents must be engaged with the plan, which is not usually problematic. Engagement of the patient, however, can be difficult, as it not infrequently conflicts with the patient’s agenda, which is to lose more weight. Most inpatient management plans deal directly with ongoing, perpetuating issues rather than delving into the aetiological reasons for the development of the disorder.

A helpful aspect of treatment is to ‘externalise’ the eating disorder, separating the thoughts attributable to the perpetuation of the disorder and its associated behaviours per se, and the thoughts of the patient. This then leads to there being two parts to the patient; one being the eating disorder/illness, and the other the person who is sick of AN, sick of doctors, and wants to be with friends and family. The goal is to make the latter part stronger than the former. It is critically important to involve the family in the treatment plan.

In hospital, regular eating of three meals and three snacks a day is encouraged to optimise physical health and gain weight. Calcium supplementation is appropriate if dietary intake is inadequate, aiming for 1500 mg/day (which is achievable from food). No medication has been found effective in overcoming AN, but psychotropic medication can sometimes be required for inpatients who are particularly distressed by gaining weight. Educational needs have to be provided, and normalisation of interactions with the (non-AN) peer group are encouraged. The most difficult aspect is getting the patient to relinquish the eating-disordered lifestyle and achieve a normal non-AN (healthy) lifestyle.

The mainstay of Family Based Treatment is to restore weight by using the family to take control over the young person’s eating. The focus is not on exploring the aetiological factors that may or may not be responsible for the onset of the disorder. Once a healthy weight has been achieved, wider developmental and emotional concerns are able to be addressed.

Food and eating

Any appeal that food may have had has usually gone by the time a patient with AN commences eating; previous positive feedback from the smell and taste of food are almost eradicated by severe weight loss and food deprivation. Oral eating is encouraged. Nasogastric feeding can be required if young people refuse to eat orally.

Most units offer three meals and three snacks a day, and may safely refeed at 8000 KJ/day. In the initial phase, the goal is to achieve a weight gain of at least 1 kg a week. Measurement of electrolytes for refeeding syndrome should occur daily for the first week.

The patients may well complain of fullness and bloating after eating; these feelings eventually resolve. A very rare complication of refeeding is the superior mesenteric artery syndrome, where the patient complains of chronic abdominal pain and feeling full after a meal, with subsequent vomiting, which can be due to compression of the superior mesenteric bundle and the third part of the duodenum (which is no longer protected by the fat pad around the bundle, the fat pad having disappeared).

Once the % IBW reaches about 90%, the patient’s pre-morbid personality tends to return, such as regaining a sense of humour. It is only then that many patients realise just how disturbed they were at a lower weight. Some consider AN a ‘temporary brain syndrome’, as starvation from causes other than AN (e.g. voluntary starvation for scientific research) can lead to profound changes in thinking, mood and behaviour very similar to AN, which are reversed with refeeding.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

Introduction

There have been many developments in ADHD management in the last few years. There is overwhelming evidence that methylphenidate and dexamphetamine are highly effective for treating the symptoms of ADHD in the short term. However, improvements in long-term academic or behavioural outcome have not been clearly established. Recent evidence-based studies have attempted to answer this question; the issue of cardiovascular side effects has been raised, and whether stimulants should be used in preschoolers has been addressed; these issues are discussed below.

In the USA, ADHD is diagnosed in 3–10% of children and 1–6% of adults. In 1999 the Center for Disease Control and Prevention identified ADHD as a serious public health problem. Children diagnosed with ADHD are likely to have social and academic impairments and low self-esteem. Having ADHD is associated with increased risk of academic failure, early school drop-out, delinquency, substance abuse, traffic accidents and criminal offences. The rate of medication treatment for ADHD has increased in the last decade. In 1997, over 2 million children in the USA were treated with stimulants. Less than 10% of children diagnosed as having ADHD do not respond to stimulants or cannot tolerate them due to adverse side effects. Newer non-stimulant medications such as atomoxetine have been used in ADHD recently, plus the wider use of longer-lasting stimulant medications.

The aims of this long-case section, as well as of the subsequent short-case section, are as follows:

Background information

Few diagnostic labels have caused as much media controversy and divergence of opinion as ADHD. Despite different rates of diagnosis in different countries, similar prevalence rates are reported across different cultures when standard diagnostic criteria are applied rigorously. Traditionally, ADHD is very commonly diagnosed in the USA but remains less frequently diagnosed in the UK. Diagnosis rates within Australia are somewhere in between. There is still uncertainty as to whether ADHD represents the dysfunctional end of a continuum of normal temperamental characteristics or whether it represents a discrete qualitatively different biological or psychological condition. The name for this behavioural syndrome has changed over the years, from labels that were unpopular with parents (‘minimal brain damage’) to ‘minimal brain dysfunction’, ‘hyperkinetic child syndrome’, ‘minimal cerebral dysfunction’, ‘psycho-organic syndrome of childhood’, to attention deficit disorder (ADD) and finally ADHD, which has been the most widely accepted term.

There is no single diagnostic test for ADHD. The DSM-IV manual sets out the criteria, grouped under the following headings:

The criteria set out in DSM-IV should be fulfilled, at the very least, before a diagnosis of ADHD is entertained. In the age of evidence-based medicine, some cynics note that the criteria used in the DSM-IV are described using terminology that is not entirely succinct; the words ‘often’ and ‘some’ figure strongly in the criteria, although they are not concise quantitative or even qualitative terms, but the meaning they impart is integral in the determination as to whether the criteria are met. However, the requirement that six or more of nine symptoms of inattention and/or six or more of the nine symptoms of hyperactivity/impulsivity must be ‘often’ present defines a group of children of primary school age statistically who are more deviant than 90% of other children the same age. There is some valid statistical basis for these terms. As for the exclusion criteria, accurate appraisal of childhood psychiatric diagnoses is outside of the scope of most paediatricians.

It would be overly simplistic to equate the symptoms of ADHD with the disability or problems experienced by the child with ADHD, or to equate successful symptom control with successful treatment. A two-step approach can be followed. The first step is to confirm that the symptoms are present, to fulfil the criteria and to exclude differential diagnoses. The second step is to assess the child’s development and ask whether the symptoms are a problem. It only becomes a disorder if the symptoms lead to developmental delays, or problems in other areas such as learning, social development, self-esteem, mental health, fine motor abilities and organisational skills. The candidate needs to define the developmental predicament: which areas of development are impacted on by the self-control problems seen in ADHD.

The aetiology of ADHD is likely to be multifactorial, a combination of genetic, biological and environmental aspects. Twin studies suggest that 75% of the cause of ADHD is genetic. Parental ADHD increases the risk of ADHD in the child eightfold. Researchers have been trying to find a candidate gene for ADHD. The most recognised gene association is the 7-repeat allele of the D4 dopamine receptor gene (DRD4∗7); agonists at the D4 receptor site include dopamine, adrenaline and noradrenaline. Independent of parental ADHD, exposure to cigarettes and alcohol in utero increases the risk of ADHD.

Parents and health workers can get ‘hung up’ on whether a child has ADD or ADHD. This differentiation is unimportant. The hyperactivity in a child’s condition does not alter the principles behind treatment. The hyperactivity in ADHD refers more to restlessness and increased minor motor function rather than ‘swinging from the trees’. The condition does not refer to ‘naughty children’. Children who destroy your office are not demonstrating the hyperactivity to which the ‘H’ in ADHD refers.

ADHD may be regarded as a spectrum disorder. Children with ADHD have varying degrees of the different characteristics that make up the condition, which include inattention, impulsivity, overactivity, insatiability, disorganisation and social clumsiness.

One of the difficulties of diagnosis is that all children can have the characteristics, comprising the diagnostic criteria, to some degree. Most 3-year-olds could comfortably meet all the criteria. The difficulty is in determining when these characteristics become pathological or at the severe end of normal development. These characteristics may lead to difficulties in learning, social interaction and behaviour. The home environment may accentuate the severity of subsequent symptoms and difficulties with which children and their families have to deal. Poor parenting skills are not the cause of true ADHD, but they may well exacerbate matters.

For the strict clinical diagnosis of ADHD, refer to the ICD-10 and DSM-IV criteria. Confusion in the diagnosis can result from difficulty in differentiating other disorders that can cause inattention and hyperactivity, and in identifying co-morbid diagnoses. A comprehensive differential diagnosis is listed in the short-case section. It includes the normal, active preschool child, autistic spectrum disorder, conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, reaction to social problems/environment (poor parenting skills, disruptive family dynamics), expressive language disorders, hearing impairment and epilepsy syndromes (e.g. childhood absence epilepsy).

Co-morbid diagnoses include the following:

It has been hypothesised that there is a delay in maturation of inhibitory processes in the brain; this presents a useful working model of this condition. A loss of inhibition could explain decreased ability to concentrate, impulsive behaviour and motor hyperactivity. Children with ADHD have similar problems to children with frontal lobe deficits (problems with executive functions). A delay in functional cortical maturation of the frontal lobes has been hypothesised, with some support from some preliminary research studies of non-invasive functional MRI (fMRI) and quantitative EEG (QEEG), although these tests are not useful clinical tools at present.

The frequency of diagnosis varies between countries. In some states of the USA, over 25% of boys are taking stimulant medication for ADHD. In Australia, it has been estimated to affect between 1 and 5% of the population. Difficulty arises in diagnosis because the condition is considered as a delay in maturation of normal learning processes. Poor short-term memory, lack of concentration, impulsiveness and hyperactivity are all normal in a child at 3 years of age. By age 5–7, however, these characteristics are usually controlled. This is the reason why many kindergarten and primary school teachers describe these children as immature. Approximately 95% of children will be capable of controlling these characteristics by 5–7 years of age. Although parents, teachers and health professionals seem quite comfortable with the concept of a spectrum of developmental motor function (some normal children walk at 10 months, others at 18 months), any apparent delay within the spectrum of the (normal) development of learning engenders great concern. It should help to remember that the brain is continually growing, doubling in size in the first 12 months of life, with neuronal growth occurring throughout adolescence and adult life. Obviously, this growth and development will not occur at the same rate in all children.

Children with ADHD tend to have selective concentration. They can become obsessive in concentration if the situation or task interests them, such as a video game or television, but are unable to concentrate on a task of no specific interest. These children have difficulty concentrating in a group situation. It is as if they are unable to filter information coming into the brain from sight, hearing and/or touch; they may be unable to differentiate, for example, between the teacher talking, the birds singing outside and little Johnny dropping his pencil in the classroom. All this sensory information appears to be presented to the brain at the same level of importance. In a mature learning system, the brain is able to sift and differentiate, excluding useless information and only processing what is important at the time.

Parents will often describe their child with ADHD as bright, but lacking concentration and persistence in a task. Children with ADHD tend to have poor organisational skills, be argumentative and impulsive, tend not to read body language well and make poor eye contact. Some will be said to display poor ‘eye–hand coordination’; cynics also dislike, and question the usefulness of, this term, pointing out that most of the central nervous system is interposed between the eye and the hand. These children may have difficulty with reading and writing. If one considers the sensory–motor processing required for these two functions, it is not surprising. Most parents will report that these children respond well to a one-on-one learning situation.

The age at diagnosis often reflects the difficulty these children are having, and the likely difficulty the physician will experience in their management. They may present in the early years of schooling with poor behaviour, lack of concentration, fidgetiness and impulsiveness. These characteristics may be described by teachers as immature behaviour. For some children, this leads to poor school performance and loss of self-esteem, and worsening general behaviour. Other children’s problems are not recognised until they reach secondary school, when poor organisational skills result in decreased work performance and subsequent loss of self-esteem. The workload is difficult because they have not obtained the basic building blocks/foundations in their education. In this situation, some children may present with depression or symptoms of chronic lethargy. Disruptive behaviour in the classroom may develop as an avoidance technique.

Recent developments in ADHD management

Recent evidence-based data has emerged that is challenging the way this condition has been managed previously. Important studies have been released, which have called into question several aspects of typical stimulant prescribing and use. There has been debate for years as to whether short-term effects of stimulants lead to any long-term benefits; so far there has been a paucity of well-designed studies to answer this issue. Some studies show academic improvement in the short term, but benefits gone by 3 years; some show no effect of stimulant use on academic outcomes, and some have found long-term academic gains, particularly in mathematics.

Long-term outcomes associated with stimulant medication in treating children with ADHD have been evaluated in the Western Australian Pregnancy Birth Cohort (Raine) study, which is an unique ongoing longitudinal study following 2868 children, with data collection since 1989, and with data at 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 14 and 17 years of age; of the 1785 adolescents on the sample, 131 (7.3%) had received a diagnosis of ADHD. The demographics are as follows: 75.6% males (versus 48.95% male in non-ADHD), 22% lower-income families (versus 12.0% of non-ADHD diagnosed), 14.6% mothers under 20 years (versus 8.8% non-ADHD), 18% did not have the biological father living in same house at the time of birth (versus 9.4% of non-ADHD). Of the 131 with ADHD, 16% reported stimulant use at all three follow-up points (8, 10 and 14 years), 32.1% at two follow-up points, 29.8% at one follow-up point and 22.1% no use of stimulants at any follow-up point.

Outcome measures at 14 years of age included social, emotional, educational, physical and cardiovascular aspects. This study found the following: there were no significant differences based on medication use for depression, self-perception and social functioning; there was no effect of stimulants on depressive symptoms; there was poorer self-perception in children diagnosed with ADHD (versus non-ADHD), with no effect from stimulant exposure on adolescent self-perception profile; and there was a lower level of social functioning within children diagnosed with ADHD, with no effect of stimulant exposure on the social functioning score. Academic performance: of the ADHD children, 49.4% were performing ‘below age level’ according to their teacher, whereas 16.5% of non-ADHD were performing below age level, and school enjoyment levels were lower in ADHD children, which was not altered by stimulants. Physical effects: no significant differences in average weight or height (at age 14) when comparing children consistently receiving medication to those never medicated. Children who received stimulants consistently at all time points had significantly greater diastolic blood pressure than children who never had stimulants (10.79 mmHg greater); these children also had higher diastolic blood pressure than children who currently received stimulants but not previously (7.05 mmHg higher). On parent-rated measures, externalising behaviour and attentional problems did not change between the ages of 5 and 14, irrespective of whether or not medication was given. Of course, the major limitation of this study is that children with ADHD were not randomised to stimulant medication treatment or non-treatment. Those treated with stimulants are likely to have more severe problems at onset than those not treated with stimulants. Comparing outcomes at adolescence is therefore highly questionable, and certainly not indicative that stimulant medication treatment has no positive impact on symptoms in the long term. It is highly unlikely that a long-term randomised controlled trial of treatment versus no treatment will ever be conducted to answer this question.

In June 2009, a study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry undermined the confidence of many regarding the safety of stimulant medication; among 564 children and adolescents who died suddenly either due to unknown causes, or cardiac dysrhythmia, the rate of stimulant use (specifically methylphenidate) was 1.8%, compared with 0.4% for a matched group of children and adolescents who died as passengers in motor-vehicle accidents (odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 1.4–74.9; P = 0.02). Three days after the study was published, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) urged caution in interpreting the results of the study, issuing this statement: ‘Given the limitation of this study’s methodology, the FDA is unable to conclude that these data affect the overall risk and benefit profile of stimulant medications used to treat ADHD in children. FDA believes that this study should not serve as a basis for parents to stop a child’s stimulant medication.’

The spread of this disquieting new information, that stimulant medications, specifically methylphenidate, are associated with a six- to seven-times increased risk for sudden death in children and adolescents, was not slowed by the FDA’s statement. The study’s authors noted that sudden death was a rare event even among children who take stimulants; however, they concluded that careful assessment is necessary when prescribing these medications.

This then led to recommendations from learned bodies as to what constituted ‘careful assessment’. Prior to this, the American Heart Association (AHA) had, in 2008, already released a scientific statement regarding the risk of sudden cardiac death and the use of stimulants. It had noted, ‘between 1999 and 2003, 25 people (19 children) taking ADHD medications died suddenly and 43 people (26 children) experienced cardiovascular events such as strokes, cardiac arrest, and heart palpitations’ and, ‘Additional data in children from 1992 to February 2005 revealed 11 sudden deaths associated with methylphenidate and 13 associated with amphetamines. Additionally, 3 sudden deaths were reported in children on atomoxetine between 2003 and 2005.’

The AHA statement noted that certain cardiac diagnoses are associated with an increased risk of ADHD (e.g. hypoplastic left heart survivors [two thirds have attention deficits], patients with 22q11 microdeletion [35–55% have ADHD symptomatology] and patients with total anomalous pulmonary venous drainage [50% have ADHD symptomatology]), which could go some way towards explaining the increased risk of cardiovascular complications.

The AHA statement recommended taking a thorough cardiac history, including a comprehensive family history, and cardiovascular examination, plus an ECG. The particular conditions to be uncovered are those that increase the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). SCD has three main groups of causes: cardiomyopathies, primary electrical disease, and congenital heart disease (esp. cyanotic or repaired). A more comprehensive list is as follows (mnemonic: ABCD HELPs WPWMarfan):

See Chapter 6 (Cardiology) for more details. Candidates need to be informed of these controversies around the potential cardiovascular adverse side effects of stimulants.

The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) made available draft Australian ADHD Guidelines on 30 November 2009. These draft guidelines contain evidence-based information covering all aspects of ADHD. In particular, this draft pointed out that there was insufficient positive evidence to support the use of pharmacological therapeutic agents in preschool children diagnosed with ADHD, except in severe cases. Two short-term studies were identified that addressed the use of stimulants in preschoolers; one showed improvements in core ADHD symptoms, but no significant improvement in measures of compliance and attention tasks; the other produced reductions in ADHD symptoms, but an increased number and type of side effects compared to older children. No studies met inclusion criteria that addressed the long-term safety and efficacy of stimulants medications in preschoolers. Two studies were noted that reported on adverse outcomes in preschoolers receiving methylphenidate; these included decreased appetite, nightmares, feeling sad/unhappy, trouble sleeping, weight loss, emotional outbursts and social withdrawal. Candidates are advised to obtain a copy of this draft, and use it as the main reference for the management of ADHD, as it is very comprehensive and well written. It is available at www.health.gov.au/internet/ministers/publishing.nsf/Content/mr-yr09-nr-nr222.htm

History

Diagnosis of ADHD

There is no single diagnostic test for ADHD. For the diagnosis to be made, documentation is required of specific impairing symptoms of the disorder in at least two settings, according to the criteria set out in the current ICD-10 and DSM-IV diagnostic manuals. These criteria act as a guide, as do the various ADHD rating scales (see below) for parents, teachers and the child. A thorough clinical history is essential. The history may enable the exclusion of differential diagnoses (especially social causes) and the inclusion of co-morbid conditions. The examination can be very rewarding in excluding ADHD impersonators (see the short-case section). Several evaluation tools can be used, but no test commonly employed by school-based psychologists (such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scales) can distinguish children with ADHD from normal children, with any reliability.

Management

Correct diagnosis is essential for appropriate management. It is important to establish that drug therapy is not the only option for treating this condition, although stimulant medication has been proved more effective than any form of behavioural therapy. Adolescent patients may gain sufficient understanding of their difficulties that they do not require drug treatment, but rather develop strategies to cope. There are children who will not respond to basic behavioural management/assisted teaching techniques without the use of medication.

A child with ADHD can have significant problems with communication, which may be exacerbated by the family’s behaviour. Some households have the television turned on most of the day, and during dinner the children are asked to be quiet so that Dad can listen to the news. Significant improvement in behaviour can be achieved simply by asking the family to turn the television off during dinner. Encouraging parents to learn how to communicate with, rather than talk at, their children, is important. While obvious to most physicians, this can be a startlingly new concept to many families. Adolescent patients in particular should not have a television in the bedroom. This will only lead to more reclusive behaviour and reinforce poor communication skills. One approach is to turn the television off after 6 p.m. and encourage the parents to help children with their homework, or alternatively play family games, which promote communication and learning to take one’s turn. Simple techniques such as these can be effective in changing the child’s behaviour. Most social skills and behaviour are learned at home, not at school.

School strategies (educational management principles)

School difficulties are almost universal in children with ADHD. Specific problem areas may include mathematics, reading, writing or abstract thinking. Parents and teacher should be aware that these children may have difficulty with loud background noise. Short-term auditory processing is difficult, and the children need to be brought back on task. Instructions should be short, direct and repeated. Eye contact with the child is important when giving instructions. These children perform best in small classes. Teachers who have a firm, fair, consistent teaching style will find that the student copes better. Some children with significant problems may need the assistance of an integration aide. Children with poor fine/gross motor coordination may need the assistance of occupational or physical therapy. Some children will have speech difficulties requiring speech therapy.

Tutoring on a one-to-one basis can help these children significantly. A good tutor can liaise with the teacher to document specific deficiencies in the child’s knowledge base. It is important to ensure that, for each child, the proper foundation stones for their education are laid. This will enable them to go to the next step. As these children succeed, their self-esteem will improve markedly.

The areas of difficulty in the classroom can be divided into eight groups as follows, with three sample suggestions for each area:

1. Inattention. Maximise attention by: (a) seating the child at front of class, near a good role model; (b) breaking longer assignments into smaller sections, so the child can see an endpoint to the work, and mastering material within his or her attention span; (c) pairing written instructions with oral instructions.

2. Impulsiveness. Counter this by: (a) complementing positive behaviour and increasing immediacy of rewards; (b) using time out for misbehaviour, avoiding lecturing or criticism; (c) supervising carefully at transition times.

3. Motor activity. Reduce overactivity by: (a) allowing the child to run errands that involve movement; (b) allowing the child to stand at times during schoolwork; (c) providing breaks between academic tasks.

4. Socialisation. Improve this by: (a) giving frequent praise to appropriate behaviour; (b) encouraging cooperative learning tasks with other children; (c) encouraging the child to take up an activity with supervised socialisation (e.g. sporting groups, scouts).

5. Academic skills. Overcome learning difficulties by: (a) organising remedial assistance for specific problem areas; (b) if mathematics is a problem, allowing a calculator, and providing additional time for maths; (c) if written language is weak, allowing non-written project submissions (using a tape recorder or a word processor).

6. Mood. Increase self-esteem by: (a) setting easily obtainable goals initially, then increasing the difficulty of tasks; (b) assisting the child to feel his or her contributions to the class are significant; (c) providing reassurance and encouragement.

7. Compliance. Increase compliance by: (a) seating the child near the teacher; (b) ignoring minor misbehaviour and reinforcing good behaviour; (c) recognising the positive behaviour of a child seated nearby.

8. Organisational planning. Help the child to follow instructions by: (a) checking homework assignments written down in a homework diary; (b) encouraging neatness but not criticising sloppiness; (c) encouraging the child to use notebooks with dividers and folders to organise schoolwork.

There are many CD-ROMs available that help these children to improve their skills in mathematics, spelling, reading and abstract writing. Computerised learning techniques provide audiovisual reinforcement and allow the child to learn in a more efficient manner, and can be graded to the child’s current ability.

Ideally, the above matters should be addressed before considering drug therapy. If the child is not responding to these techniques, then medication may be considered. While drugs are not a panacea in the management of a child’s condition, if used appropriately they can be very helpful. Children require close supervision if medication is to be used; as the brain is continually developing, the response to medication may vary over time.

Medication

If drugs are used in a child with ADHD, the paediatrician (the candidate) managing the child needs to ensure that the drugs have treated the symptoms successfully. However, symptom treatment does not mean that the development will suddenly normalise. There is more to management than just knowing the drugs used and their side effects. The candidate should be able to delineate how the educational, social, behavioural and emotional problems are currently being managed to rehabilitate the child.

Stimulants

These are the mainstay of treatment for ADHD. Controversy remains as to whether they can cause long-term growth suppression. It is established that they do not result in substance abuse disorders during treatment, and their use may protect against developing substance abuse later in life. Stimulants may be short-acting (3–6 hours), intermediate-acting formulations with extended release (ER) (6–8 hours), or long-acting (8–12 hours), which can be given once daily.

Short-acting: dexamphetamine, methylphenidate (MPH)

The most widely used are dexamphetamine and MPH. Dexmethylphenidate is the d-isomer of MPH and a newer preparation; it is more active than the l-isomer, has fewer side effects, requires half the standard MPH dose and lasts 4–6 hours. Dexamphetamine’s mechanism of action involves increasing extracellular synaptic dopamine, inhibiting noradrenaline reuptake and exerting weak effects on the serotonin system. Its average duration of action is 5 hours and its half-life is 3–6 hours. MPH’s mechanism is thought to involve selective binding of the presynaptic dopamine transporter (DAT) in striatal and prefrontal areas, with the effect of increasing extracellular dopamine levels, as does dexamphetamine. MPH also acts on the noradrenaline system by blocking the noradrenaline transporter; its average duration of action is around 3 hours and its half-life is 2–4 hours. The stimulant effect commences between 30 and 60 minutes after taking the dose. Both medications have similar side-effect profiles, and in head-to-head trials neither appears to have an advantage over the other; each works in around 70% of children diagnosed with ADHD. In children with co-morbid psychiatric disorders, stimulants may worsen the symptoms of the condition, especially in those with tic and mood disorders.

Dexamphetamine: dose range 0.2–1.0 mg/kg/day (usually 0.3–0.7 mg/kg/day; maximum 40 mg/day).

MPH: dose range 0.25–2.0 mg/kg/day (usually 0.3–0.7 mg/kg/day; maximum 60 mg/day).

The side-effect profiles for both drugs are similar: anorexia, weight loss (often 1–2 kg in the first 3 months), emotional lability, insomnia, social and emotional withdrawal, and occasional psychotic reaction. Most side effects are dose-related. Both drugs have a good safety record.

It is suggested that at first the dose is small (say, a morning dose of 5 mg), gradually increasing every 3–4 days to help reduce unwanted side effects. Generally, medication is best given two or three times a day. An afternoon dose at 3 p.m. often helps older children with their homework. Suggested dose times are with breakfast (7–8 a.m., to achieve therapeutic levels while in class during the morning), lunch (around 12 noon, to achieve therapeutic levels in class during the afternoon—often a smaller dose than at breakfast) and immediately after school (3–4 p.m.—a smaller dose than at lunch, to avoid the phenomenon of rebound hyperactivity as that dose wears off; later or higher doses can lead to insomnia).

Non-stimulants

Clonidine (an alpha-2 noradrenergic agonist)

A second-line option, clonidine is not as effective as stimulants in ADHD, but can be useful if there is a co-morbid tic disorder. It can cause loss of appetite, and sedation. Clonidine has been used for years, despite concerns about its efficacy and safety, to reduce impulsive behaviour, aggressive tendencies and oppositional-defiant symptoms. It has been used in combination with stimulants, as it allows a lower dosage of these medications to be used; there have been sporadic reports of death from this combination, however. One side effect of clonidine is drowsiness for 60–90 minutes, approximately 30 minutes after taking the tablet, which excludes its use as a morning dosage in children. The duration of behavioural effects is 3–6 hours (oral preparation). In the USA, a patch form is available, which can last 5 days. In patients in whom drowsiness is not a problem, it may be useful in a twice-daily dosage.

Nocturnal dosage of clonidine, with the side effect of drowsiness, counteracts the insomnia in patients that occurs with the stimulants dexamphetamine and methylphenidate, and can help in ADHD patients with primary sleep problems. Tics are not uncommon in children with ADHD, and it is now recognised that tics do not increase if these children receive stimulant medication; clonidine can be useful in the management of tics. Low doses are used in ADHD (1–3 micrograms/kg/dose). The Tourette’s Syndrome Study Group reported a RCT that found that clonidine plus methylphenidate together lead to significant improvement in ADHD symptoms, tic severity and global functioning. The dosages of clonidine used in ADHD rarely affect blood pressure. Parents must be told all the significant side effects of clonidine, including the cardiotoxicity of overdosage, and the uncommon but recognised complication of sudden discontinuation, which results in rebound hypertension. Other side effects include depression, dry mouth, hypotension (rare), confusion (with high doses) and local irritation with the transdermal form. Parents must be fully informed as to all the potential side effects of this alpha-2 noradrenergic agonist, including the several reports of death associated with the use of clonidine together with stimulants.

Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs): imipramine, desipramine

These have been recommended as second-line options in the past, but now are rarely used. The likely mechanism of action of TCAs is on catecholamine reuptake. They may have potential benefits in children with ADHD and co-morbid mood disorders, anxiety disorders and tic disorders, but they have major potential cardiotoxicity. Children who have not been coping well with ADHD can develop low self-esteem and depression. Rather than initiate antidepressant medication, it is preferable to address the specific problems of the child. If co-existing depression, sadness or anxiety are severe, then antidepressants may be warranted, and they may clarify thinking and improve concentration. For ADHD without depression, antidepressants are rarely justified. As with clonidine, overdosages may be cardiotoxic (heart block and rhythm disturbances that, rarely, can be fatal). There have been reports of sudden, unexpected death in four children treated with desipramine. The author has encountered children admitted to paediatric intensive care units after an overdose of (inadvertent poisoning by) antidepressants prescribed for ‘ADHD’ in children as young as 3 years old has been taken by the patients themselves or by their friends or siblings, because no drug safety precautions were taken in the home. Antidepressants are much less popular with patients and parents than stimulants. Parents must be fully informed as to all the potential side effects of TCAs, including the cardiotoxicity.

Prognosis

If ADHD can be considered a delay in the normal maturational processes of a developing brain—in particular, the frontal cortex and its connections—then there is an analogy with the maturational delay in nocturnal enuresis; as occurs in children with nocturnal enuresis, the problem may continue into adulthood. Many children either grow out of their ADHD (myelination in the frontal lobes is not completed until adolescence) or, as adults, learn to cope with the specific characteristics that cause them difficulty. As the condition is dynamic rather than static, children with this condition require regular review. It is not appropriate to prescribe medication and see the child once or twice a year for renewal of the prescription. It is more appropriate to follow them on a minimum 3-monthly basis to assess both social and academic progress.

During adolescence, which is often a difficult time for any child, patients may require more frequent follow-up. It is not uncommon for the adolescent patient to require a decrease in stimulant dosage. Always ask about HEADS: Home, Education & Employment, Alcohol & Activities, Drugs, Sexuality & Suicide/depression. Assessment of drug effect/side effects/compliance is critical, along with assessment of sleep patterns, growth/eating habits and blood pressure if taking medication.

Children with ADHD and co-morbid conduct disorder represent a poor prognostic group. It is not uncommon for these children to leave school at an early age. Children with poorly controlled conduct disorder have a high probability of being in trouble with the law by the age of 21 years (in reality, it is usually much earlier). Sometimes the best that can be achieved for these children is the teaching of life skills. They are often not candidates for stimulant medication, as it is usually abused with other drugs or sold for money. Principles for life skills include the teaching of budgeting, communication skills and organisational skills. If taught to budget, then these children are less likely to resort to unlawful means of obtaining money. Good communication skills may allow them to cope within the workforce and can increase the likelihood of establishing a stable relationship with a spouse.

Alternative treatments

The management of children diagnosed as having ADHD can be an emotional minefield. Parents at the end of their tether will try many and varied treatments, and any suggested ‘cure’ or quick fix will invariably lead some parents to try unorthodox treatments suggested by ‘practitioners’ of no fixed ability, representing a range of ‘therapies’. Challenging this approach may damage the doctor–patient/parent relationship. While unusual ‘therapies’ can ‘work’ in children who do not really have ADHD, the fact remains that stimulants are the most effective treatment, but as long as there are desperate parents, there will be charlatans who will make money from treatments that have no scientific basis. Most alternative treatments are ‘justified’ by the suggestion that drug therapy will not be necessary; universally, their theoretical justification is inconsistent with current scientific knowledge. Included within the many non-traditional approaches are: optometric training, tinted lenses, megavitamins, patterning, kinaesthesiology, homeopathic substances to counter ‘allergens’, and sound therapy. Most of these therapies have not undergone controlled clinical trials, and their use is based on anecdotal testimony. The disadvantages to these approaches include high cost, wasting valuable time, delay in commencing recognised treatments, and damage to self-esteem caused by suggestions that the child’s eyes, brain or ability to handle food are abnormal.

Diet has been suggested as a cause of ADHD. To date, many diets have been tried without success. The picture here is somewhat cloudy, as there are some children who appear to become hyperactive when exposed to certain food dyes or preservatives. This phenomenon is seen in normal children as well as in children with ADHD, but the behavioural changes are somewhat exacerbated in children with ADHD. Most parents are aware of changes in their child’s behaviour when exposed to these foods (e.g. tomato sauce, chocolate and various types of ‘junk food’). Rather than adopting specialist restrictive diets, the best approach is to keep a simple food diary to identify the particular culprit and then restrict this from the diet. Despite some mythology about sugar (quote from one parent, ‘He can’t have sugar, it sends him hypo! He had it once, he went mad for a week!’), sugar is never the culprit.

Autistic disorder (autism)

Recently, there has been an increased emphasis on earlier diagnosis of children with ASD. There is consensus, in the absence of any robust RCT evidence, that early intensive behavioural interventions are likely to be beneficial to children with autism. Twin and family studies infer that most autism arises from genetic factors; the investigational armamentarium has been increased to include chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA), which uses computer chip technology to screen hundreds of segments of DNA simultaneously, and enables detection of submicroscopic genomic deletions and duplications or copy-number variants (CNVs) smaller than 5 megabases (Mb).

Children with autism demonstrate impairment in three areas: (i) reciprocal social interaction; (ii) communication; and (iii) repetitive, restricted, stereotyped behaviours and interests. There is a range from mild eccentricities to severe developmental disabilities: in view of the qualitative and quantitative differences in symptomatology, autism now is often termed ‘autistic spectrum disorder’ (ASD), including classic autism and its milder ‘variants’ such as Asperger’s syndrome and pervasive developmental disorder—not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS). This section deals with classic autistic disorder, and although it alludes to the conditions under the ASD umbrella, it does not discuss them.

There are few medications that are useful in autism. Exceptions are methylphenidate (MPH), risperidone and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). MPH can decrease hyperactivity, but this can be at the expense of increased social withdrawal and irritability. Risperadone can improve behaviour, but its use is limited by adverse effects (weight gain, drowsiness, prolactinaemia and tremor). There is consensus that SSRIs may improve symptoms in ASD, although there are no RCTs, but this can be at the expense of increase in agitation, hostility and even suicidal ideation.

The aim of this long-case section is as follows:

To give a practical guide to the management of children diagnosed as having autistic disorder/autism (by correctly interpreted criteria of ICD-10 [World Health Organization: ICD-10 Classification of mental and behavioural disorders: clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines, 1992] or DSM-IV [American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and standard manual of mental disorders, 4th edn, 1994]). This section predominantly follows the DSM-IV manual, and discusses the classic autistic disorder. It does not cover the milder ‘variants’ of autistic disorder, such as Asperger’s disorder/syndrome (intellectual ability within the average range and, superficially at least, normal early language development: there are a multiplicity of varying criteria for this depending on which ‘authoritative’ source is read) or pervasive developmental disorders (PDD) in the DSM-IV. The term ‘autistic spectrum disorder’ (ASD) is widely used now to encompass autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, atypical autism and pervasive developmental disorder—not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), but it does not appear in the DSM-IV. Within the PDD classification in DSM-IV are included Rett disorder and childhood disintegrative disorder.

To enable diagnosis of conditions that can be misinterpreted as autism (which can be a pitfall in the environment of increased diagnoses of ‘ASD’).

To clarify which potential aetiological factors have some evidence, and which do not but receive adverse publicity, to counter much misinformation in the lay press.

To give clear guidelines regarding therapies for which there is evidence of efficacy and therapies for which there is insufficient evidence to support their use. Autism is an area in which ‘complementary’ and ‘alternative’ medical therapies (CAM) are widely used. While parents appreciate their doctor’s support for their use of their chosen CAM, it is also important to caution them against therapies that could have significant detrimental effects on their child’s health (and on their finances).

Background information

Autism is known to be a more heterogeneous disorder than was appreciated a decade ago. In keeping with other behavioural diagnoses, there has been much controversy and divergence of opinion within the medical fraternity as to the classification of autism and its milder variants, and associated pervasive developmental diagnoses. The prevalence of classic autism is 1 in 1000, and of ASD is around 2 in 1000. There seems to have been a rise in prevalence, partially due to changed criteria that include milder forms within the spectrum of autism, partially due to increased recognition by both the public and professionals, and perhaps also due to a true rise in prevalence. There is no single diagnostic test for autism. The DSM-IV manual sets out the criteria for autism disorder grouped under headings as follows:

The criteria set out in DSM-IV should be fulfilled before a diagnosis of autism is entertained.

There are a number of ‘red flags’ or developmental warning signs, of possible ASD, that can be identified and divided into four age groups: infants, preschool age, school age and adolescents.

Infant warning signs:

at 6–9 months, poor eye contact, absent facial expression, decreased social smiling, delayed babbling;

at 9–12 months, less turning to name, not following a point when adult indicates and points to an object, tuning into environmental sounds more than human voice, infrequent babbling;

at 12–15 months, absence of any words, lack of pointing, lack of showing objects of interest to others, failure to follow simple verbal command with a gesture, failure to wave bye-bye;

at 15–18 months, lack of imitation, lack of engagement with other people, loss of previously acquired words, decreased variety of play, limited symbolic play.

Preschool-age warning signs:

no pointing, no pretending, no perception (of others);

no taking turns, no taking interest (in others), no taking part (in games);

no speech, no sharing (pleasure), no starting games, no social play;

unable to communicate non-verbally, unusual mannerisms, unusual reactions to sensory stimuli.

School-age warning signs:

cannot follow games, cannot follow trends (classroom ‘norms’; overly critical of teachers), cannot follow social cues (in relation to adults, too intense or no relationship at all), cannot follow social ‘norms’ (overwhelmed by social situations);

cannot cope with altered environments (unstructured situations such as school camps), or large/open environments (not sure how to organise self in unstructured space, hugging perimeter of sports fields), or a totally new environment (cannot cope with change).

Adolescence warning signs:

difficulty making/keeping friends in peer group (gets on more easily with adults or younger children), difficulty ‘getting’ jokes (taking things literally, does not ‘get’ sarcasm or metaphor), difficulty adapting style of communication (can be too formal or, conversely, too familiar);

rigid thinking (lacking imagination), rigid behaviour (ritualistic, repetitive);

unaware of personal space invasion, unaware of peer group ‘norms’;

talking ‘at’ rather than with, talking with unmodulated (flat), repetitive speech pattern, talking about very limited range of topics of own interest only.

Aetiology

Autism can be the endpoint of a number of disorders: fragile X syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, Angelman syndrome and Down syndrome can cause children to have symptomatology that fulfils the criteria of DSM-IV. Under 25% of autistic children have a demonstrable recognisable aetiological disorder. Twin studies demonstrate a significant genetic component. Monozygotic twins have 60% concordance for classic autistic disorder, and up to 90% for ASD. Dizygotic twins and siblings have a 10% concordance for classic autism, and 30% for other developmental issues, including personal/social issues as well as speech and language delays. Over the decades, many theories have attempted to explain the thought processes apparent in autism. In terms of cognitive explanations, there are currently three main theories, discussion of which is beyond the scope of this section: ‘executive dysfunction’ (inability to plan, inability to inhibit socially inappropriate responses, inability to flexibly shift attention), ‘weak central coherence’ (inability to integrate pieces of information into a meaningful whole) and ‘lack of theory of mind’ (lack of the ability to attribute feelings and belief systems to others and appreciate they are different to one’s own).

Some more famous pieces of misinformation about autism deserve mention. Despite several controversial claims in the lay press, extrapolated from an article in 2001 in the journal Medical Hypotheses, it is clear that there is no causative association between thiomersal and autism. Thiomersal was a mercury-containing preservative once used in multiple-dose vaccines. It has now been removed from vaccines, and is therefore no longer an issue (indeed, the prevalence of autism increased in Denmark after cessation of thiomersal-containing vaccines). Similarly, an article in The Lancet in 1998 proposed an association between autism and MMR vaccine. It is now clear that there is no causative association between autism and the administration of the MMR vaccine. There have been many spurious claims regarding theories of causation of autism over the last few years, which, like the MMR belief, seemed to endure well after they have been debunked effectively in medical and scientific literature. Hypotheses on aetiology lead to hypotheses on treatment. Hence, claims for various treatment modalities have had similar levels of credibility (e.g. secretin), but persist (see below). As autism is without cure, and parents will explore any avenue that might help their child, it is not surprising that many parents of children with autism have tried many unproven therapies and may not follow rational advice.

History

Current symptoms

1. Impaired social interaction: impaired non-verbal behaviours (level of eye contact, cuddling family members, hugging, facial expressions, body posture, gestures used), any friends of similar age, any attempts at sharing of interests, enjoyment, achievements, show-and-tell at preschool, showing toys to friends and family, bringing or pointing out objects of interest, any demonstration of empathy, social or emotional.

2. Impaired communication: current level of spoken language, ability to converse with another, quality of language, any unusual patterns of speech quality and content, including echolalia, repetition, pronoun reversal and semantic pragmatic language disorder.

3. Behaviour patterns: preferring own company, tendency to be a loner, ‘in his own world’, wandering aimlessly, preoccupation with specific areas of interest (e.g. able to talk only about Star Wars). Depends not on the presence of special interests, but on the level of handicap from the time spent with and intrusion on routines and family members. For the less able, may involve primary sensory stimulation; for example, fascination with noises, lights, patterns, and movements of objects or part objects. The underlying deficit is a lack of reciprocity in social interaction, communication and imagination.

4. Most problematic behaviours at present (e.g. rituals, anxiety, aggression, self-injury) and the impact of these on family, educational facility (e.g. special school), therapists and carers.

5. Co-morbid problems:

Coexistent epilepsy: details of seizures (see the long case on seizures in Chapter 13, Neurology; 7–14% of children with autism have epilepsy).

Past history

Any illnesses predating first features of autism (e.g. meningitis, encephalitis, other intracranial pathology, head injury). Details of past history of coexistent diagnoses (e.g. tuberous sclerosis complex). Symptoms leading to the diagnosis may include symptoms referrable to the following:

Previous therapies tried, previous medication tried, past medical investigations (e.g. serum ferritin, chromosomal analysis, psychometric testing, audiology, EEG).

Diagnosis of autism

There is no pathognomonic sign, no definitive biological marker and no diagnostic laboratory test for autism. To make the diagnosis, specific impairing symptoms of the disorder must be documented according to the criteria set out in the current ICD-10 and DSM-IV diagnostic manuals. Multidisciplinary teams are involved in the diagnosis of autism in Australia, the UK and the USA. They comprise a range of professionals that usually includes a doctor (paediatrician or psychiatrist), psychologist, speech therapist, occupational therapist and social worker. A thorough neurological and general medical examination must be performed (as per the short-case approach).

Several evaluation tools can be used. Autism may be suspected by routine developmental surveillance (see below). The next step involves a number of autism-specific screening tests (see below). The traditional tool for developmental screening, the Denver-II (DDST-II, formerly the Denver Developmental Screening Test—Revised), is regarded as being insensitive and lacking in specificity. Similarly, the Revised Denver Pre-Screening Developmental Questionnaire (R-DPSDQ) is not recommended for primary-care developmental surveillance.

There is a wide differential diagnosis for the ASDs. In children with neurogenetic disorders, autistic behaviour can be a prominent aspect of their medical condition. The most common of these disorders are fragile X syndrome (affected gene FMR1), which comprises less than 5% of autism, and tuberous sclerosis (affected genes TSC1 and TSC2, encoding hamartin and tuberin, respectively), which comprises less than 3% autism (but 8–14% of autism with epilepsy). Another neurocutaneous syndrome, neurofibromatosis type 1, can also cause autistic features.

Dysmorphic syndromes associated with autism include Smith–Lemli–Opitz (11q12-13, gene DHCR7 [7-dehydrocholesterol reductase]), Smith–Magenis (17p11.2), Cohen (8q22, gene COH1), Timothy (gene CACNA1C), Joubert (gene AHI1) and Bannayan–Riley–Ruvalcaba (gene PTEN) syndromes. Other genetic causes include cortical dysplasia – focal epilepsy syndrome (gene CNTNAP2) and PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome (gene PTEN). Several deletion syndromes (16p11 [gene PRKCB1], 22q13 [gene SHANK 3], 2q37 [genes KIF1A, GBX2]) and duplication syndromes (15q duplication and 16p duplication) have specific associations with autism.

Other genetic disorders, such as Down syndrome or Angelman syndrome (deletion maternal 15q11–q13 [in 70–75%], mutation in the E3 ubiquitin protein ligase gene, UBE3A [in 5–10%]) may be associated with ASD because of their cognitive involvement.

Chromosomal abnormalities have been described in 5–9% of patients with ASD. Two loci commonly associated with autism on chromosome 7, 7q22 and 7q31, contain several genes that have been implicated in the pathogenesis of autism, including the RELN gene at 7q22 (neuronal migration and prenatal neural connections) and the MET gene at 7q31 (development of cerebral cortex and cerebellum), and the Williams–Beuren syndrome region at 7q11.23 has several genes involved with impairment of language and social interaction. The prevalence of intellectual impairment with autism is around 50–75%. Rett syndrome, which always has autistic disorder, is the only ICD-10 psychiatric disorder defined by aetiology.

Karyotyping cannot detect submicroscopic genomic deletions and duplications or copy-number variants (CNVs) smaller than 5 megabases (Mb). Because of the strong genetic component to ASDs, testing has been extended to chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA; also called array comparative genomic hybridisation [array CGH]) with whole genome coverage, which shows the highest detection rate among clinically available genetic tests for ASD, finding more abnormalities than G-banded karyotype and fragile X DNA testing. CMA uses computer chip technology to screen hundreds of segments of DNA simultaneously. CMA cannot detect balanced translocations, but detects deletions and duplications well. Around 9% of females with ASD and 7% of males with ASD have abnormal CMA.

Several inborn errors of metabolism can cause autistic features, notably phenylketonuria, creatine deficiency syndromes, adenylosuccinate lyase deficiency and metabolic purine disorders. Mitochondrial disorders also can be associated; there is evidence that overproduction of the gene SLC25A12, which encodes the predominant isoform of the mitochondrial aspartate/glutamate carrier (AGC) in the brain, may be involved in the pathophysiology of autism. Metabolic diseases lead to accumulation of toxic metabolites, reduction of myelin, loss of neurons, and altered dopaminergic and serotoninergic neurotransmissions.

There is some association between epilepsy and regressive autism; 30% of children with autism have seizures. There is altered calcium signalling in autism; the bioelectrical instability caused by mutations of L-type voltage gated calcium channels may explain the high prevalence of seizures in autistic children.

The differential diagnoses are listed in the short-case section.

Screening tests and diagnostic instruments

Investigations

Management

Prognosis depends on intellect and the establishment of functional communication by the age of 5 years.

Management can be divided into seven groups of headings, with the mnemonic SPECIAL:

Pharmacotherapeutic intervention

In autism, an effective medical treatment has yet to be found for the core problems involving language and social cognition, although the atypical antipsychotic agent risperidone does show some promising effects in improving social relatedness, and managing interfering, stereotyped and repetitive behaviours. Its use should be limited to associated psychiatric problems of aggression, self-injury, hyperactivity, anxiety or stereotypes.

Irrespective of which drug is used, informed consent should be obtained regarding potential benefits and potential adverse side effects. Safe storage of medication in the home is essential. Careful and regular review must be carried out to monitor response, and carers, schoolteachers and general practitioners must be kept apprised of any change in, or new addition to, the therapeutic armamentarium.

Four main groups of behaviours may show a positive response to medication, as follows.

Alternative treatments

The management of children with autism can be an emotional minefield. Parents at the end of their tether will try many and varied treatments, and any suggested ‘cure’ will invariably lead some parents to try unorthodox treatments. Challenging this approach may damage the doctor–patient/parent relationship. As long as there are desperate parents, there will be people who make money from treatments with no scientific basis. Included within the many non-traditional approaches are three examples listed below. The disadvantages to these approaches may include cost, wasting valuable time, delay in trying recognised treatments and potential public health issues (e.g. refusing to get a child immunised for fear of autism).

Diet has been suggested as a cause of autism. To date, many diets have been tried (e.g. gluten-free) without success. As many children with autism have restricted diets as a result of their self-imposed eating routines, their parents appreciate sensible guidelines on healthy eating. This advice should be the same as for any child, including avoiding caffeinated drinks and excessive fruit juice, and encouraging the intake of adequate water, fibre and fresh foods.

The following are some examples of alternative treatments for autism that have insufficient evidence to support them:

Short Cases

Child suspected of having ADHD

The lead-in here could be: ‘This child does not seem to concentrate at school’, ‘This boy has trouble paying attention’ or ‘The parents are worried he has ADHD. Could you assess please?’

Given that so many conditions can present with inattention and hyperactivity, a fairly comprehensive mnemonic may help: ACCURATE DIAGNOSIS HIGHLY DESIRABLE contains the vast majority of diagnoses or problems that must be excluded, or taken into consideration, before ADHD is diagnosed.

Remember that ADHD has no single diagnostic test; the diagnosis is based on criteria, many of which can apply to a multitude of conditions, both normal and abnormal (see the long case). All the DSM-IV criteria can be met by a normal 3-year-old; hence the reluctance to diagnose ADHD in children under 6 years.

Just as ‘all that wheezes is not asthma’, so ‘all that is inattentive and/or hyperactive is not ADHD’. Furthering that analogy, if all wheezing were treated simply with bronchodilators, then diagnoses such as inhaled foreign body would be missed and the treatment would not work. Similarly, if all inattentiveness, impulsiveness or hyperactivity were treated simply with stimulants, diagnoses such as obstructive sleep apnoea, iron deficiency and lead intoxication would be missed and the stimulants would not work.

These conditions can mimic ADHD or can coexist with ADHD. Most have been encountered by the author. Several causes listed may seem far-fetched (e.g. faking ADHD just to get government benefits, or to get dexamphetamine to sell); these will be relevant in the real world, rather than in the examination format, but are noted for completeness.

Examination

The examination is to detect (exclude) any of the above diagnoses. It comprises a combined neurological, developmental and dysmorphic assessment, plus growth percentiles, vision and hearing.

Child with possible autism/autistic spectrum disorder (ASD)

The approach given here can be used for a short-case approach to a child suspected of having autism or autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), or to guide the examination of a child with autism who presents as a long case.

The differential diagnosis for autism/autistic spectrum disorder is broad. The mnemonic used here is DIFFERENT CHILD:

Examination

A suggested order for the examination is as follows.

10 Developmental assessment

Gross motor, personal–social, fine motor adaptive. Be aware that the Denver-II lacks specificity (see the long case). Check spoken language (chat about an area of interest for that child, such as trains, wheels). The draw-a-person test is a good clinical measure of IQ/conceptual development. Reading age can be clinically estimated by testing the length of word the child can read. In autism, reading recognition is frequently better than comprehension. A specimen of handwriting can be useful, as poor legibility may indicate poor fine motor organisation.

Regarding gross motor assessment, most normal children can hop by 5 years, skip by 6 and (by report from parent) ride a bike without training wheels by 7. Also, a tennis ball is very useful to test a child of an appropriate age. A child can usually throw a ball to the examiner’s (your) hand by age 4, catch a tennis ball bounced to his or her hands by 5½ years, catch a ball in the air with the hands (when thrown to child’s hands) by 6 years, move to a ball to catch it by 7½, and catch a ball in a container by 8½.

Mention to the examiners that there are various levels of assessment for autism. These can be listed under the headings routine developmental surveillance, autism-specific screening tests, diagnostic parental interviews and diagnostic observation instruments (see the long case for more detail).

The diagnostic criteria as noted in the DSM-IV should be mentioned to demonstrate the candidate’s knowledge: