Behavioural and developmental paediatrics

Published on 21/03/2015 by admin

Filed under Pediatrics

Last modified 21/03/2015

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 1324 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.

Buy Membership for Pediatrics Category to continue reading. Learn more here