Recent Trends in Childhood Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To examine trends in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and median household income. DESIGN An ecologic study of trends in the diagnosis of ADHD using the Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) health plan medical records. Rates of ADHD diagnosis were derived using Poisson regression analyses after adjustments for potential confounders. SETTING Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena. PARTICIPANTS All children who received care at the KPSC from January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2010 (n = 842 830). MAIN EXPOSURE Period of ADHD diagnosis (in years). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Incidence of physician-diagnosed ADHD in children aged 5 to 11 years. RESULTS Rates of ADHD diagnosis were 2.5% in 2001 and 3.1% in 2010, a relative increase of 24%. From 2001 to 2010, the rate increased among whites (4.7%-5.6%; relative risk [RR] = 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4), blacks (2.6%- 4.1%; RR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9), and Hispanics (1.7%-2.5%; RR = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.5-1.7). Rates for Asian/Pacific Islander and other racial groups remained unchanged over time. The increase in ADHD diagnosis among blacks was largely driven by an increase in females (RR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.3). Although boys were more likely to be diagnosed as having ADHD than girls, results suggest the sex gap for blacks may be closing over time. Children living in high-income households were at increased risk of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS The findings suggest that the rate of ADHD diagnosis among children in the health plan notably has increased over time. We observed disproportionately high ADHD diagnosis rates among white children and notable increases among black girls.
Article: Childhood ADHD[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Since publication of DSM-IV in 1994, the prevalence of parent-reported diagnosed attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has tripled to more than 10% of children. Although it is hard to know for sure whether ADHD is overdiagnosed, underdiagnosed, or misdiagnosed, it is argued that ADHD is especially prone to diagnostic inflation and overdiagnosis. Therefore, we propose a model of stepped diagnosis for childhood ADHD, which may reduce overdiagnosis without risking undertreatment. Calling attention to stepped diagnosis and formalizing the steps may improve its application in clinical practice. (Journal of Psychiatric Practice 2014;20:169–177)Journal of Psychiatric Practice 01/2014; 20(3):169-177. DOI:10.1097/01.pra.0000450316.68494.20 · 1.35 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: High rates of comorbidity and overlapping diagnostic criteria between pediatric bipolar disorder (BD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) contribute to diagnostic and treatment confusion. To advance what is known about both disorders, we compared effect of emotional stimuli on response control in children with primary BD, primary ADHD and typically developing controls (TDC). Participants included 7-17 year olds with either "narrow-phenotype" pediatric BD (n = 25), ADHD (n = 25) or TDC (n = 25). Groups were matched on participant age and FSIQ. The effect of emotional stimuli on response control was assessed using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery Affective Go/No-Go task (CANTAB AGN). We found a group by target valence interaction on commission errors [F(2,71) = 5.34, p < 0.01, ƞ p (2) = 0.13] whereby ADHD, but not TDC participants, made more errors on negative than positive words [t(24) = -2.58, p < 0.05, r = 0.47]. In contrast, there was a nonsignificant trend for BD participants to make fewer errors on negative versus positive words compared to ADHD and TDC participants. Between-subjects effects showed that ADHD participants made more errors than TDC, but not BD participants. Our main finding advances what is known about the effect of emotional stimuli on response control in children with ADHD. Our results suggesting a positive affective processing bias in children with ADHD compliment emerging literature show that difficulties with emotional processing and regulation may be core features of ADHD. Further, given the observed pattern of results in children with ADHD compared to BD children, our behavioral results suggest the importance of examining differences in the brain-behavior mechanisms involved in affective processing in children with ADHD compared to BD children.European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 02/2015; DOI:10.1007/s00787-015-0686-4 · 3.70 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Child and adolescent mental health problems are common, associated with wide-ranging functional impairments, and show substantial continuities into adult life. It is therefore important to understand the extent to which the prevalence of mental health problems has changed over time, and to identify reasons behind any trends in mental health.Scope and MethodologyThis review evaluates evidence on whether the population prevalence of child and adolescent mental health problems has changed. The primary focus of the review is on epidemiological cross-cohort comparisons identified by a systematic search of the literature (using the Web of Knowledge database).FindingsClinical diagnosis and treatment of child and adolescent psychiatric disorders increased over recent decades. Epidemiological comparisons of unselected population cohorts using equivalent assessments of mental health have found little evidence of an increased rate of ADHD, but cross-cohort comparisons of rates of ASD are lacking at this time. Findings do suggest substantial secular change in emotional problems and antisocial behaviour in high-income countries, including periods of increase and decrease in symptom prevalence. Evidence from low- and middle-income countries is very limited. Possible explanations for trends in child and adolescent mental health are discussed. The review also addresses how cross-cohort comparisons can provide valuable complementary information on the aetiology of mental illness.Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 12/2014; DOI:10.1111/jcpp.12372 · 5.42 Impact Factor