Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000713
Carol C Weitzman, Oana DeVinck-Baroody, Rachel M. Moore, Sarah S Nyp
ADHD Curry AE, Yerys BE, Metzger KB, et al. Traffic crashes, violations, and suspensions among young drivers with ADHD. Pediatrics. 2019;e20182305. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common childhood disorder that often persists into adolescence, when driving typically begins for most. Recent studies have found first-crash involvement to be 36% higher among drivers with ADHD compared with other adolescents. Curry et al. conducted a large retrospective cohort study to compare monthly rates of overall and specific crash types, violations, and suspensions over the initial 4 years of licensure for adolescent drivers with and without ADHD. A cohort of primary care patients at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia born between 1987 and 1997 were examined with linkage of electronic health records and state traffic data. A total of 14,936 adolescents were included, and 12% had a diagnosis of ADHD. Curry et al. found that crash rates were higher for drivers with ADHD regardless of licensing age, especially during the first month of licensure (adjusted rate ratio [ARR]: 1.62 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18–2.23]). After adjusting for potential covariates and temporal trends, the 4-year crash rate of novice adolescent drivers with ADHD was 37% higher than that of drivers without ADHD (ARR 5 1.37, 95% CI: 1.26–1.48). Those with ADHD had 2.1 times higher rate of alcoholrelated crashes than that of drivers without ADHD, and in the first year of driving, the rate of alcohol and/or drug violations was 3.6 times higher for adolescents with ADHD. In addition, rates of moving violations were consistently higher for drivers with ADHD over the study period (at 48 months ARR: 1.47; [95% CI 1.36–1.58]). Information about the rates of medication use in this sample was not reported. This study highlights the need to support young drivers, particularly right after they obtain their license, with a focus on also decreasing risktaking behaviors. O.V.B.
Curry AE, Yerys BE, Metzger KB,等。患有多动症的年轻司机的交通事故、违规行为和停牌行为。儿科。2019;e20182305。注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)是一种常见的儿童疾病,通常会持续到青春期,而大多数人开始开车的时候。最近的研究发现,与其他青少年相比,患有多动症的司机首次撞车的几率要高36%。Curry等人进行了一项大型回顾性队列研究,比较了有和没有多动症的青少年司机在获得驾照的最初4年里,总体和特定碰撞类型、违规行为和停牌的月发生率。对1987年至1997年间出生的费城儿童医院初级保健患者进行了一组电子健康记录和州交通数据的联系检查。共有14936名青少年被纳入研究,其中12%被诊断为多动症。Curry等人发现,无论驾照年龄大小,ADHD司机的撞车率都更高,尤其是在驾照的第一个月(调整后的比率[ARR]: 1.62[95%置信区间(CI): 1.18-2.23])。在调整潜在协变量和时间趋势后,患有ADHD的青少年新手驾驶员的4年撞车率比没有ADHD的驾驶员高37% (ARR 5 1.37, 95% CI: 1.26-1.48)。与没有多动症的司机相比,患有多动症的司机发生与酒精相关的撞车事故的几率要高出2.1倍。在驾驶的第一年,患有多动症的青少年发生酒精和/或药物违规的几率要高出3.6倍。此外,在研究期间,ADHD司机的违章率一直较高(48个月时的ARR: 1.47;[95% ci 1.36-1.58])。该样本中有关药物使用率的信息未被报道。这项研究强调了支持年轻司机的必要性,特别是在他们刚刚获得驾照之后,重点是减少冒险行为。O.V.B.
{"title":"Journal Article Reviews.","authors":"Carol C Weitzman, Oana DeVinck-Baroody, Rachel M. Moore, Sarah S Nyp","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000713","url":null,"abstract":"ADHD Curry AE, Yerys BE, Metzger KB, et al. Traffic crashes, violations, and suspensions among young drivers with ADHD. Pediatrics. 2019;e20182305. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common childhood disorder that often persists into adolescence, when driving typically begins for most. Recent studies have found first-crash involvement to be 36% higher among drivers with ADHD compared with other adolescents. Curry et al. conducted a large retrospective cohort study to compare monthly rates of overall and specific crash types, violations, and suspensions over the initial 4 years of licensure for adolescent drivers with and without ADHD. A cohort of primary care patients at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia born between 1987 and 1997 were examined with linkage of electronic health records and state traffic data. A total of 14,936 adolescents were included, and 12% had a diagnosis of ADHD. Curry et al. found that crash rates were higher for drivers with ADHD regardless of licensing age, especially during the first month of licensure (adjusted rate ratio [ARR]: 1.62 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18–2.23]). After adjusting for potential covariates and temporal trends, the 4-year crash rate of novice adolescent drivers with ADHD was 37% higher than that of drivers without ADHD (ARR 5 1.37, 95% CI: 1.26–1.48). Those with ADHD had 2.1 times higher rate of alcoholrelated crashes than that of drivers without ADHD, and in the first year of driving, the rate of alcohol and/or drug violations was 3.6 times higher for adolescents with ADHD. In addition, rates of moving violations were consistently higher for drivers with ADHD over the study period (at 48 months ARR: 1.47; [95% CI 1.36–1.58]). Information about the rates of medication use in this sample was not reported. This study highlights the need to support young drivers, particularly right after they obtain their license, with a focus on also decreasing risktaking behaviors. O.V.B.","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74366169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000718
Meghan K. Breheney
with dyslexia: a review on current intervention methods. Med J Malaysia. 2018;73:311–320. 21. Hulme C, Snowling MJ. Reading disorders and dyslexia. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2016;28:731–735. 22. Ozernov-palchik O, Gaab N. Tackling the ‘dyslexia paradox’: reading brain and behavior for early markers of developmental dyslexia. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2017;7:156–176. 23. Evans WN, Morrill MS, Parente ST. Measuring inappropriate medical diagnosis and treatment in survey data: the case of ADHD among school-age children. J Health Econ. 2010;29:657–673. 24. Bishop DVM. Ten questions about terminology for children with unexplained language problems. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2014;49:381–415. 25. Copyright C, Brooks G, Burton M, et al. Downloaded on 2018-1101T20. 2007;54:36Z. 26. Coon ER, Quinonez RA, Moyer VA, et al. Overdiagnosis: how our compulsion for diagnosis may be harming children. Pediatrics. 2014;134:1013–1023. 27. Willcutt EG, Pennington BF. Psychiatric comorbidity in children and adolescents with reading disability. J Child Psychol Psychiatry Allied Discip. 2000;41:1039–1048. 28. Shemesh E, Annunziato RA, Ambrose MA, et al. Child and parental reports of bullying in a consecutive sample of children with food allergy. Pediatrics. 2013;131:e10–e17. 29. Stein JF. Does dyslexia exist? Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2018;33:313–320. 30. Cortiella C, Horowitz S. The state of learning disabilities: facts, trends and emerging issues. Natl Cent Learn Disabil. 2014:1–52.
{"title":"Bullying, School Violence, and Climate in Evolving Contexts","authors":"Meghan K. Breheney","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000718","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000718","url":null,"abstract":"with dyslexia: a review on current intervention methods. Med J Malaysia. 2018;73:311–320. 21. Hulme C, Snowling MJ. Reading disorders and dyslexia. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2016;28:731–735. 22. Ozernov-palchik O, Gaab N. Tackling the ‘dyslexia paradox’: reading brain and behavior for early markers of developmental dyslexia. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2017;7:156–176. 23. Evans WN, Morrill MS, Parente ST. Measuring inappropriate medical diagnosis and treatment in survey data: the case of ADHD among school-age children. J Health Econ. 2010;29:657–673. 24. Bishop DVM. Ten questions about terminology for children with unexplained language problems. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2014;49:381–415. 25. Copyright C, Brooks G, Burton M, et al. Downloaded on 2018-1101T20. 2007;54:36Z. 26. Coon ER, Quinonez RA, Moyer VA, et al. Overdiagnosis: how our compulsion for diagnosis may be harming children. Pediatrics. 2014;134:1013–1023. 27. Willcutt EG, Pennington BF. Psychiatric comorbidity in children and adolescents with reading disability. J Child Psychol Psychiatry Allied Discip. 2000;41:1039–1048. 28. Shemesh E, Annunziato RA, Ambrose MA, et al. Child and parental reports of bullying in a consecutive sample of children with food allergy. Pediatrics. 2013;131:e10–e17. 29. Stein JF. Does dyslexia exist? Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2018;33:313–320. 30. Cortiella C, Horowitz S. The state of learning disabilities: facts, trends and emerging issues. Natl Cent Learn Disabil. 2014:1–52.","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74436592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000700
L. Bilaver, J. Havlicek
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to measure racial and ethnic disparities in autism-related services among U.S. children with parent-reported autism spectrum disorder (ASD). METHODS Using the 2011 Survey of Pathways to Diagnosis and Services, we analyzed parent-reported data on 1420 children with current ASD in the nationally representative sample. An estimation method consistent with the Institute of Medicine's definition of health care disparities is used to measure racial and ethnic disparities. RESULTS The findings revealed Latino-white disparities in the percentage of children currently using school-based occupational and physical therapy and Latino-white and "other race"-white disparities in the percentage of children using physical therapy outside of school. There were no statistically significant black-white disparities. Instead, the study found that the percentage of black children with ASD receiving school-based services was 8 points higher than that of white children (p < 0.04). Factors unrelated to the need for autism services were largely unassociated with the receipt of services. CONCLUSION The findings provide a partial baseline and identify a need for further examination of the source of existing disparities and the lack of disparities found for specific services and minority groups.
{"title":"Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Autism-Related Health and Educational Services.","authors":"L. Bilaver, J. Havlicek","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000700","url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\u0000The objective of this study is to measure racial and ethnic disparities in autism-related services among U.S. children with parent-reported autism spectrum disorder (ASD).\u0000\u0000\u0000METHODS\u0000Using the 2011 Survey of Pathways to Diagnosis and Services, we analyzed parent-reported data on 1420 children with current ASD in the nationally representative sample. An estimation method consistent with the Institute of Medicine's definition of health care disparities is used to measure racial and ethnic disparities.\u0000\u0000\u0000RESULTS\u0000The findings revealed Latino-white disparities in the percentage of children currently using school-based occupational and physical therapy and Latino-white and \"other race\"-white disparities in the percentage of children using physical therapy outside of school. There were no statistically significant black-white disparities. Instead, the study found that the percentage of black children with ASD receiving school-based services was 8 points higher than that of white children (p < 0.04). Factors unrelated to the need for autism services were largely unassociated with the receipt of services.\u0000\u0000\u0000CONCLUSION\u0000The findings provide a partial baseline and identify a need for further examination of the source of existing disparities and the lack of disparities found for specific services and minority groups.","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"95 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74646730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000716
Kristen R. Choi, M. Easterlin, M. Szilagyi
Decades of epidemiological and clinical research have demonstrated that adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have long-lasting, harmful effects on health across the life span. Studies of adults and children find high rates of ACEs and strong evidence for their link to poor mental health, physical health, behavior, and social development. There is a higher burden of ACEs among populations that are already vulnerable, such as racial/ ethnic minorities, low-income or underemployed families, and sexual minorities. ACEs can lead to poor health and social outcomes (e.g., chronic illness, substance use, homelessness, violence victimization, and poverty) by producing toxic stress and dysregulating child development. ACEs classically include abuse, neglect, and other kinds of within-household dysfunction; however, in recent years, there has been growing recognition of adverse experiences outside the home (such as bullying, racism, and community violence) that can also produce deleterious outcomes. Adverse community environments often co-occur with—or are the foundation for— within-household ACEs, creating a “pair of ACEs” inside and outside the home that compound risk. Experiences of adverse community environments are now often included in contemporary conceptualizations of ACEs in both research and practice. When ACEs of either kind are severe, repetitive, or prolonged and produce a sustained toxic stress response—especially in the absence of loving caregiver relationships that buffer toxic stress —they can have profound, harmful effects. Childhood adversity has been studied in the context of immediate family and community environments in the existing ACE literature, but there is a need to consider a more upstream question: What creates the conditions necessary for childhood adversity to thrive in families and communities? Social determinants of health (e.g., inequality, racism, poverty, neighborhood safety, and access to social or health resources) and policy (i.e., local, state, and federal law) can play a central role in creating these conditions. To fully understand childhood adversity, we must understand the broader, upstream context in which ACEs develop and consider upstream interventions. This includes consideration for social determinants and policies that shape a child’s lived environment and lead to increased risk of ACEs both inside and outside the home. In the United States, we contend that federal policy actions—or, in some cases, inactions—have introduced new pathways for experiences of adversity into the lives of children. We note 5 particular areas of policy in the current US political context that have potential to expose children to adversity and warrant a policy advocacy response from pediatric professionals:
{"title":"Traumatogenic Potential of Federal Policy in the Lives of Children.","authors":"Kristen R. Choi, M. Easterlin, M. Szilagyi","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000716","url":null,"abstract":"Decades of epidemiological and clinical research have demonstrated that adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) have long-lasting, harmful effects on health across the life span. Studies of adults and children find high rates of ACEs and strong evidence for their link to poor mental health, physical health, behavior, and social development. There is a higher burden of ACEs among populations that are already vulnerable, such as racial/ ethnic minorities, low-income or underemployed families, and sexual minorities. ACEs can lead to poor health and social outcomes (e.g., chronic illness, substance use, homelessness, violence victimization, and poverty) by producing toxic stress and dysregulating child development. ACEs classically include abuse, neglect, and other kinds of within-household dysfunction; however, in recent years, there has been growing recognition of adverse experiences outside the home (such as bullying, racism, and community violence) that can also produce deleterious outcomes. Adverse community environments often co-occur with—or are the foundation for— within-household ACEs, creating a “pair of ACEs” inside and outside the home that compound risk. Experiences of adverse community environments are now often included in contemporary conceptualizations of ACEs in both research and practice. When ACEs of either kind are severe, repetitive, or prolonged and produce a sustained toxic stress response—especially in the absence of loving caregiver relationships that buffer toxic stress —they can have profound, harmful effects. Childhood adversity has been studied in the context of immediate family and community environments in the existing ACE literature, but there is a need to consider a more upstream question: What creates the conditions necessary for childhood adversity to thrive in families and communities? Social determinants of health (e.g., inequality, racism, poverty, neighborhood safety, and access to social or health resources) and policy (i.e., local, state, and federal law) can play a central role in creating these conditions. To fully understand childhood adversity, we must understand the broader, upstream context in which ACEs develop and consider upstream interventions. This includes consideration for social determinants and policies that shape a child’s lived environment and lead to increased risk of ACEs both inside and outside the home. In the United States, we contend that federal policy actions—or, in some cases, inactions—have introduced new pathways for experiences of adversity into the lives of children. We note 5 particular areas of policy in the current US political context that have potential to expose children to adversity and warrant a policy advocacy response from pediatric professionals:","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82246571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000691
K. Rea, Melissa Armstrong-Brine, Lisa Y. Ramirez, T. Stancin
OBJECTIVE Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) screening completion rates are often low despite their validity and influence on earlier intervention and positive treatment outcomes. This study sought to examine the use of one ASD screening tool, the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers-Revised (MCHAT-R), in a racially and ethnically diverse urban pediatric clinic to review potential disparities within screening rates and referral practices. METHODS A retrospective chart review was conducted for children (N = 999) within the ages of 17 to 34 months seen for a well-child appointment at one of 3 pediatric clinics: a general pediatric clinic, resident pediatric clinic, and Hispanic pediatric clinic. RESULTS MCHAT-R screening completion rates were low for all clinics. There were no significant differences in MCHAT-R screening completion based on ethnicity; however, the percentage of children screening positive on the MCHAT-R was significantly higher for Hispanic versus non-Hispanic children. Referral practices were highly variable across positive screenings, and few children received the appropriate combination of referrals. CONCLUSION Ethnic disparities in ASD positive screening rates and inconsistent referrals represent a critical issue in current pediatric practice. There is a great need for the development of more culturally sensitive ASD screening instruments. Additionally, to help increase ASD screening rate and accuracy, as well as consistency in referrals, greater emphasis is needed on professional training, parental education, and technology use within pediatric clinics.
{"title":"Ethnic Disparities in Autism Spectrum Disorder Screening and Referral: Implications for Pediatric Practice.","authors":"K. Rea, Melissa Armstrong-Brine, Lisa Y. Ramirez, T. Stancin","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000691","url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\u0000Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) screening completion rates are often low despite their validity and influence on earlier intervention and positive treatment outcomes. This study sought to examine the use of one ASD screening tool, the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers-Revised (MCHAT-R), in a racially and ethnically diverse urban pediatric clinic to review potential disparities within screening rates and referral practices.\u0000\u0000\u0000METHODS\u0000A retrospective chart review was conducted for children (N = 999) within the ages of 17 to 34 months seen for a well-child appointment at one of 3 pediatric clinics: a general pediatric clinic, resident pediatric clinic, and Hispanic pediatric clinic.\u0000\u0000\u0000RESULTS\u0000MCHAT-R screening completion rates were low for all clinics. There were no significant differences in MCHAT-R screening completion based on ethnicity; however, the percentage of children screening positive on the MCHAT-R was significantly higher for Hispanic versus non-Hispanic children. Referral practices were highly variable across positive screenings, and few children received the appropriate combination of referrals.\u0000\u0000\u0000CONCLUSION\u0000Ethnic disparities in ASD positive screening rates and inconsistent referrals represent a critical issue in current pediatric practice. There is a great need for the development of more culturally sensitive ASD screening instruments. Additionally, to help increase ASD screening rate and accuracy, as well as consistency in referrals, greater emphasis is needed on professional training, parental education, and technology use within pediatric clinics.","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73763407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000717
M. Ignaszewski, Kaizad R. Munshi, Jason M. Fogler, M. Augustyn
CASE Alex is a 14-year-old Portuguese-American boy with a psychiatric history starting at age 5 who presents to your primary care practice after an insurance change.He was delivered prematurely at 32 weeks and diagnosed with congenital hypothyroidism at the age of 6 weeks and growth hormone deficiency at the age of 2 years; he is in active treatment for both. He otherwise met developmental milestones on time yet continues to have significant fatigue despite adequate sleep and vitamin D supplementation.His family history is remarkable for maternal anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts, and previous attempted suicide, as well as anxiety, alcoholism, depression, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the extended family.Alex has had multiple psychiatric diagnoses by sequential providers. He was diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder and ADHD by 5 years of age, major depressive disorder by 11 years of age, persistent depressive disorder by 12 years of age, and ultimately disruptive mood dysregulation disorder because of severe and persistent temper outbursts associated with negative mood and behavioral dysregulation, leading to recurrent crisis evaluations. He has been psychiatrically hospitalized twice, in the fifth and seventh grade, for suicidal ideation (SI) and elopement from home, respectively. He recently completed a 2-week acute residential placement, during which no medication changes were made. Current medications include escitalopram 20 mg daily, guanfacine 1 mg 3 times daily, sustained release bupropion 100 mg twice daily, levothyroxine, vitamin D, and a weekly somatropin injection. He has not been able to tolerate psychostimulants or nonstimulant agents because of treatment-emergent SI.Now in the ninth grade, he continues to be easily distracted by peers, with impulsive behaviors and reduced self-regulation. Despite receiving special education services since the fifth grade, his academic performance has been poor, and he has limited motivation. Previous testing indicated average in an intelligence quotient test, with relative deficits in working memory compared with above average strength in fluid reasoning. He dislikes school and has few friends. He has always been noted to be "immature." He displays temper tantrums at home and school around transitions and behavioral expectations and has complained of feeling "different" and misunderstood by peers in addition to having difficulty reading social cues. His interests include acting and playing Fortnite and other video/computer games. His screen time is limited to 1 to 2 hr/d by the family.As the new clinician, you raise the possibility of undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder as a unifying/underlying diagnosis with his mother, who disagrees and does not consent to additional workup despite your recommendations. How would you proceed with next steps to best support your patient and his family in obtaining further clarifying evaluation?
{"title":"Transitions, Suicidality, and Underappreciated Autism Spectrum Disorder in a High School Student.","authors":"M. Ignaszewski, Kaizad R. Munshi, Jason M. Fogler, M. Augustyn","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000717","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000717","url":null,"abstract":"CASE Alex is a 14-year-old Portuguese-American boy with a psychiatric history starting at age 5 who presents to your primary care practice after an insurance change.He was delivered prematurely at 32 weeks and diagnosed with congenital hypothyroidism at the age of 6 weeks and growth hormone deficiency at the age of 2 years; he is in active treatment for both. He otherwise met developmental milestones on time yet continues to have significant fatigue despite adequate sleep and vitamin D supplementation.His family history is remarkable for maternal anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts, and previous attempted suicide, as well as anxiety, alcoholism, depression, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the extended family.Alex has had multiple psychiatric diagnoses by sequential providers. He was diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder and ADHD by 5 years of age, major depressive disorder by 11 years of age, persistent depressive disorder by 12 years of age, and ultimately disruptive mood dysregulation disorder because of severe and persistent temper outbursts associated with negative mood and behavioral dysregulation, leading to recurrent crisis evaluations. He has been psychiatrically hospitalized twice, in the fifth and seventh grade, for suicidal ideation (SI) and elopement from home, respectively. He recently completed a 2-week acute residential placement, during which no medication changes were made. Current medications include escitalopram 20 mg daily, guanfacine 1 mg 3 times daily, sustained release bupropion 100 mg twice daily, levothyroxine, vitamin D, and a weekly somatropin injection. He has not been able to tolerate psychostimulants or nonstimulant agents because of treatment-emergent SI.Now in the ninth grade, he continues to be easily distracted by peers, with impulsive behaviors and reduced self-regulation. Despite receiving special education services since the fifth grade, his academic performance has been poor, and he has limited motivation. Previous testing indicated average in an intelligence quotient test, with relative deficits in working memory compared with above average strength in fluid reasoning. He dislikes school and has few friends. He has always been noted to be \"immature.\" He displays temper tantrums at home and school around transitions and behavioral expectations and has complained of feeling \"different\" and misunderstood by peers in addition to having difficulty reading social cues. His interests include acting and playing Fortnite and other video/computer games. His screen time is limited to 1 to 2 hr/d by the family.As the new clinician, you raise the possibility of undiagnosed autism spectrum disorder as a unifying/underlying diagnosis with his mother, who disagrees and does not consent to additional workup despite your recommendations. How would you proceed with next steps to best support your patient and his family in obtaining further clarifying evaluation?","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76950948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-16DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000706
H. Bishop, A. Curry, D. Stavrinos, J. Mirman
OBJECTIVE Motor vehicle collisions are the leading cause of death among teenagers, accounting for approximately 1 in 3 deaths for this age group. A number of factors increase crash risk for teen drivers, including vulnerability to distraction, poor judgment, propensity to engage in risky driving behaviors, and inexperience. These factors may be of particular concern and exacerbated among teens learning to drive with attention deficits. To our knowledge, our study is among the first to systematically investigate the experiences of novice adolescent drivers with attention deficits during the learner period of a Graduated Drivers Licensing program. METHOD Survey and on-road driving assessment (ODA) data were used to examine parent and teen confidence in the teens' driving ability, driving practice frequency, diversity of driving practice environments, and driving errors among teens with attention deficits as defined by attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnosis or parent-reported trouble staying focused (TSF). RESULTS When teens' driving skill was evaluated at the conclusion of the learner period, teens with ADHD exhibited more driving errors than their typically developing (TD) counterparts (p = 0.034). Teens with TSF were more likely to have their ODA terminated (p = 0.019), had marginally lower overall driving scores (p = 0.098), and exhibited more critical driving errors (p = 0.01) compared with TD teens. CONCLUSION These findings may have implications on the learning-to-drive period for adolescents with attention deficits. Adjustments may need to be made to the learner period for teens with attention deficits to account for attention impairments and to better instill safe driving behavior.
{"title":"Characterizing the Learning-to-Drive Period for Teens with Attention Deficits.","authors":"H. Bishop, A. Curry, D. Stavrinos, J. Mirman","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000706","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000706","url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\u0000Motor vehicle collisions are the leading cause of death among teenagers, accounting for approximately 1 in 3 deaths for this age group. A number of factors increase crash risk for teen drivers, including vulnerability to distraction, poor judgment, propensity to engage in risky driving behaviors, and inexperience. These factors may be of particular concern and exacerbated among teens learning to drive with attention deficits. To our knowledge, our study is among the first to systematically investigate the experiences of novice adolescent drivers with attention deficits during the learner period of a Graduated Drivers Licensing program.\u0000\u0000\u0000METHOD\u0000Survey and on-road driving assessment (ODA) data were used to examine parent and teen confidence in the teens' driving ability, driving practice frequency, diversity of driving practice environments, and driving errors among teens with attention deficits as defined by attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnosis or parent-reported trouble staying focused (TSF).\u0000\u0000\u0000RESULTS\u0000When teens' driving skill was evaluated at the conclusion of the learner period, teens with ADHD exhibited more driving errors than their typically developing (TD) counterparts (p = 0.034). Teens with TSF were more likely to have their ODA terminated (p = 0.019), had marginally lower overall driving scores (p = 0.098), and exhibited more critical driving errors (p = 0.01) compared with TD teens.\u0000\u0000\u0000CONCLUSION\u0000These findings may have implications on the learning-to-drive period for adolescents with attention deficits. Adjustments may need to be made to the learner period for teens with attention deficits to account for attention impairments and to better instill safe driving behavior.","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"174 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84998427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000705
Elizabeth Hastings, Jennifer K. Poon, S. Robert, Sarah S Nyp
CASE Kyle is a 10-year-old boy with Down syndrome and intellectual disability who is being followed up by a developmental behavioral pediatrician for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and anxiety. Kyle was initially taking a long-acting liquid formulation of methylphenidate for ADHD and fluoxetine for anxiety. Several months ago, the liquid formulation was on back order, and the methylphenidate formulation was changed to an equal dose of a long-acting capsule. Kyle is not able to swallow pills; therefore, the contents of the capsule were sprinkled onto 1 bite of yogurt each morning. Over the course of the next month, Kyle's behaviors became increasingly difficult. He was not able to tolerate loud or crowded places, and despite a visual schedule and warnings, he would become aggressive toward adults when directed to transition away from preferred activities. Fluoxetine was increased from 0.4 to 0.6 mg/kg/day at that time.One month later, his parents reported that although there may have been slight improvement in Kyle's irritability since the increase in fluoxetine, they felt he was nonetheless more aggressive and less cooperative than his previous baseline. Kyle was returned to the long-acting liquid formulation of methylphenidate at that time, and a follow-up was scheduled 2 weeks later.On return to clinic, his parents reported that Kyle's behaviors had continued to become increasingly difficult. He was described as uncooperative and aggressive at home and school. Kyle was easily upset any time he was not given his way, his behavior was corrected, or he felt that he was not the center of attention. When upset, he would yell, bite, kick, spit, or throw his body to the ground and refuse to move. At 110 pounds, Kyle's parents were no longer able to physically move his body when he dropped to the ground. This was a safety concern for his parents because he had displayed this behavior in the parking lot of a busy shopping area. Because of Kyle's aggressive and unpredictable behavior, parents no longer felt comfortable taking him to public places. Family members who had previously been comfortable staying with Kyle while his parents were out for short periods would no longer stay with him. Overall, the behaviors resulted in parents being unable to go to dinner as a couple or provide individual attention to their other children. The parents described the family as "on edge." How would you approach Kyle's management?
{"title":"Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Disruptive Behaviors, and Drug Shortage.","authors":"Elizabeth Hastings, Jennifer K. Poon, S. Robert, Sarah S Nyp","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000705","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000705","url":null,"abstract":"CASE\u0000Kyle is a 10-year-old boy with Down syndrome and intellectual disability who is being followed up by a developmental behavioral pediatrician for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and anxiety. Kyle was initially taking a long-acting liquid formulation of methylphenidate for ADHD and fluoxetine for anxiety. Several months ago, the liquid formulation was on back order, and the methylphenidate formulation was changed to an equal dose of a long-acting capsule. Kyle is not able to swallow pills; therefore, the contents of the capsule were sprinkled onto 1 bite of yogurt each morning. Over the course of the next month, Kyle's behaviors became increasingly difficult. He was not able to tolerate loud or crowded places, and despite a visual schedule and warnings, he would become aggressive toward adults when directed to transition away from preferred activities. Fluoxetine was increased from 0.4 to 0.6 mg/kg/day at that time.One month later, his parents reported that although there may have been slight improvement in Kyle's irritability since the increase in fluoxetine, they felt he was nonetheless more aggressive and less cooperative than his previous baseline. Kyle was returned to the long-acting liquid formulation of methylphenidate at that time, and a follow-up was scheduled 2 weeks later.On return to clinic, his parents reported that Kyle's behaviors had continued to become increasingly difficult. He was described as uncooperative and aggressive at home and school. Kyle was easily upset any time he was not given his way, his behavior was corrected, or he felt that he was not the center of attention. When upset, he would yell, bite, kick, spit, or throw his body to the ground and refuse to move. At 110 pounds, Kyle's parents were no longer able to physically move his body when he dropped to the ground. This was a safety concern for his parents because he had displayed this behavior in the parking lot of a busy shopping area. Because of Kyle's aggressive and unpredictable behavior, parents no longer felt comfortable taking him to public places. Family members who had previously been comfortable staying with Kyle while his parents were out for short periods would no longer stay with him. Overall, the behaviors resulted in parents being unable to go to dinner as a couple or provide individual attention to their other children. The parents described the family as \"on edge.\" How would you approach Kyle's management?","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80792175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000699
I. Malaty, D. Shineman, M. Himle
Irene Malaty, MD,* Diana Shineman, PhD,† Michael Himle, PhD‡ It was with great interest that we read the study by Wolicki et al., “Children with Tourette Syndrome in the United States: Parent-Reported Diagnosis, Co-Occurring Disorders, Severity, and Influence of Activities on Tics.” The Tourette Association of America (TAA) recently embarked upon a similar project, the 2018 TAA Impact Survey, which involved an online survey of their constituents. Similar to the study of Wolicki, the purpose of the TAA Impact Survey was to better understand the diagnostic and treatment experiences of individuals living with Tourette Syndrome (TS) and other tic disorders (TDs) as well as to understand the broad impact of tics on health and functioning. Despite key methodological and sample differences, the TAA Impact Survey corroborates a number of findings in the study of Wolicki and when examined in conjunction, provides for the complimentary and comprehensive characterization of the longitudinal impact of TS across the life span. One key methodological difference between the studies was how participants were recruited. Although the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) used cold calls to identify households where currently residing children had been diagnosed with TS, the TAA created a webbased survey disseminated to its constituents through the TAA website, email lists, and social media, as well as through the TAA Centers of Excellence program. Both methods allowed for geographic diversity, but the webbased technique allowed for acquisition of a large number of respondents (N 5 944, including 281 adults with TS/TD and 623 parents of children with TS/TD). The cold call method may have offered the advantage of less bias toward individuals associated with a TS society or comfortable with internet-based communication, whereas there may be other bias toward willing participants in phone surveys. Furthermore, the TAA Impact Survey expands upon the CDC survey by including both children with TS/TD, for whom parents completed the survey, and additionally adults with TS/TD, who selfreported about their experiences. Importantly, although the CDC survey asks only about the diagnosis of TS, the TAA Impact Survey included the broader range of TD diagnoses in addition to TS. Despite their methodological differences, the 2 studies found some consistent noteworthy findings. Encouragingly, both studies suggest that diagnosis is being made earlier. Among adults in our study, the modal time between tic onset and diagnosis was 61 years (reported by 53% of the sample), with only 32.4% being diagnosed within 2 years of tic onset. By contrast, the modal time between symptom onset and diagnosis for children was ,2 years (reported by 70.9% of the sample), which is consistent with the study of Wolicki, who reported an average time to diagnosis of 1.7 years. Consistent with the findings of Wolicki et al. regarding a high reliance on specialists to make the diagnosis (51.8% of cases), the TAA
{"title":"Tourette Syndrome has Substantial Impact in Childhood and Adulthood As Well.","authors":"I. Malaty, D. Shineman, M. Himle","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000699","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000699","url":null,"abstract":"Irene Malaty, MD,* Diana Shineman, PhD,† Michael Himle, PhD‡ It was with great interest that we read the study by Wolicki et al., “Children with Tourette Syndrome in the United States: Parent-Reported Diagnosis, Co-Occurring Disorders, Severity, and Influence of Activities on Tics.” The Tourette Association of America (TAA) recently embarked upon a similar project, the 2018 TAA Impact Survey, which involved an online survey of their constituents. Similar to the study of Wolicki, the purpose of the TAA Impact Survey was to better understand the diagnostic and treatment experiences of individuals living with Tourette Syndrome (TS) and other tic disorders (TDs) as well as to understand the broad impact of tics on health and functioning. Despite key methodological and sample differences, the TAA Impact Survey corroborates a number of findings in the study of Wolicki and when examined in conjunction, provides for the complimentary and comprehensive characterization of the longitudinal impact of TS across the life span. One key methodological difference between the studies was how participants were recruited. Although the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) used cold calls to identify households where currently residing children had been diagnosed with TS, the TAA created a webbased survey disseminated to its constituents through the TAA website, email lists, and social media, as well as through the TAA Centers of Excellence program. Both methods allowed for geographic diversity, but the webbased technique allowed for acquisition of a large number of respondents (N 5 944, including 281 adults with TS/TD and 623 parents of children with TS/TD). The cold call method may have offered the advantage of less bias toward individuals associated with a TS society or comfortable with internet-based communication, whereas there may be other bias toward willing participants in phone surveys. Furthermore, the TAA Impact Survey expands upon the CDC survey by including both children with TS/TD, for whom parents completed the survey, and additionally adults with TS/TD, who selfreported about their experiences. Importantly, although the CDC survey asks only about the diagnosis of TS, the TAA Impact Survey included the broader range of TD diagnoses in addition to TS. Despite their methodological differences, the 2 studies found some consistent noteworthy findings. Encouragingly, both studies suggest that diagnosis is being made earlier. Among adults in our study, the modal time between tic onset and diagnosis was 61 years (reported by 53% of the sample), with only 32.4% being diagnosed within 2 years of tic onset. By contrast, the modal time between symptom onset and diagnosis for children was ,2 years (reported by 70.9% of the sample), which is consistent with the study of Wolicki, who reported an average time to diagnosis of 1.7 years. Consistent with the findings of Wolicki et al. regarding a high reliance on specialists to make the diagnosis (51.8% of cases), the TAA ","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76799986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-01DOI: 10.1097/DBP.0000000000000709
E. Perrin
Ellen C. Perrin, MD This article provides encouraging data regarding routine systematic developmental screening in busy pediatric primary care practices. First, it demonstrates excellent use of quality improvement principles and methods to study the implementation of an innovative system for routine screening. Second, it shows that routine screening for emotional/behavioral symptoms and social determinants of health can be performed indeed complement each other. Third, it highlights some areas that will benefit from further innovation and research. The instruments used for emotional/behavioral symptom screening were the Pediatric Symptom Checklist for children 6 to 10 years old, the Preschool Pediatric Symptom Checklist for children 18 months to 5 years old, and the Baby Pediatric Symptom Checklist for infants (the latter 2 are components of the Survey of Wellbeing of Young Children, or SWYC: www.theswyc.org). Questions about social determinants of health and about the parent’s concerns are also components of the SWYC. Although the SWYC also includes components assessing the development of cognitive, language, and motor tasks, this realm was not included in the study.
Ellen C. Perrin,医学博士这篇文章提供了令人鼓舞的关于在繁忙的儿科初级保健实践中进行常规系统发育筛查的数据。首先,它很好地运用了质量改进的原则和方法来研究常规筛查创新系统的实施。其次,它表明,对情绪/行为症状和健康的社会决定因素的常规筛查确实可以相互补充。第三,它强调了一些将从进一步创新和研究中受益的领域。用于情绪/行为症状筛查的工具是6 - 10岁儿童的儿科症状检查表,18个月至5岁儿童的学龄前儿童症状检查表和婴儿儿科症状检查表(后两者是幼儿健康调查的组成部分,或SWYC: www.theswyc.org)。关于健康的社会决定因素和父母所关心的问题也是《社会责任公约》的组成部分。尽管SWYC也包括评估认知、语言和运动任务发展的成分,但这一领域并未包括在这项研究中。
{"title":"Screening for Both Child Behavior and Social Determinants of Health in Pediatric Primary Care: Commentary.","authors":"E. Perrin","doi":"10.1097/DBP.0000000000000709","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000709","url":null,"abstract":"Ellen C. Perrin, MD This article provides encouraging data regarding routine systematic developmental screening in busy pediatric primary care practices. First, it demonstrates excellent use of quality improvement principles and methods to study the implementation of an innovative system for routine screening. Second, it shows that routine screening for emotional/behavioral symptoms and social determinants of health can be performed indeed complement each other. Third, it highlights some areas that will benefit from further innovation and research. The instruments used for emotional/behavioral symptom screening were the Pediatric Symptom Checklist for children 6 to 10 years old, the Preschool Pediatric Symptom Checklist for children 18 months to 5 years old, and the Baby Pediatric Symptom Checklist for infants (the latter 2 are components of the Survey of Wellbeing of Young Children, or SWYC: www.theswyc.org). Questions about social determinants of health and about the parent’s concerns are also components of the SWYC. Although the SWYC also includes components assessing the development of cognitive, language, and motor tasks, this realm was not included in the study.","PeriodicalId":15655,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89152415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}