Search

Alcohol (ethanol) abuse and dependence are the most common substance use disorders among adolescents. Binge drinking occurs in up to one-third of adolescents, and alcohol use disorders occur in about 6% of this age group. Adolescents with alcohol use disorders also typically have problems with other substances and comorbid mental disorders. Validated measures are available for the clinical detection and diagnosis of adolescent alcohol use disorders and related problems. Psychosocial interventions promoting abstinence are the most common treatments for alcohol use disorders, with empirical support particularly strong for family-based approaches. Pharmacological interventions may diminish the effects of alcohol withdrawal, prevent a return to alcohol consumption, or treat comorbid mental disorders. In this population, pharmacological interventions require further investigation and, where indicated, are generally considered to be supplementary to psychosocial approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of the behavioral treatment in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA9), children participated in an intensive summer treatment program (STP). This study examined the differences between 57 children in the combined treatment (Comb) group, who were medicated, and 60 children in the behavioral treatment (Beh) group, who were unmedicated throughout the STP. Comb children were significantly better than Beh on 5 measures: rule following, good sportsmanship, peer negative nominations, and STP teacher posttreatment ratings of inattention/overactivity. Groups did not differ on any of the other 30 measures, and responded similarly to the STP over time. Comparisons to normative data revealed that Comb children were more likely to fall within the normative range on 6 measures. The differences between these results and the main MTA results, in which Comb was always superior to Beh, are discussed in terms of the relative intensity of combined treatments. The implications for future studies of pharmacological and behavioral treatment for ADHD are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

These practice parameters describe the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with substance use disorders and are based on scientific evidence regarding diagnosis and effective treatment as well as on the current state of clinical practice. Given the paucity of research on the treatment of substance use disorders in children and adolescents, many of the recommendations are drawn from the adult literature and current clinical practice. These parameters consider risk factors for substance use and related problems, normative use of substances by adolescents, the comorbidity of substance use disorders with other psychiatric disorders, and treatment settings and modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Polypharmacy (the concurrent use of more than one psychoactive drug) and other combination interventions are increasingly common for treatment of severe psychiatric problems only partly responsive to monotherapy. This practice and research on it raise scientific, clinical, and ethical issues such as additive side effects, interactions, threshold for adding second drug, appropriate target measures, and (for studies) timing of randomization. One challenging area for treatment is severe child aggression. Commonly-used medications, often in combination, include psychostimulants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and alpha-2 agonists, which vary considerably in terms of perceived safety and efficacy. Results In designing our NIMH-funded trial of polypharmacy, we focused attention on the added benefit of a second drug (risperidone) to the effect of the first (stimulant). We selected these two drugs because their associated adverse events might neutralize each other (e.g., sleep delay and appetite decrease from stimulant versus sedation and appetite increase from antipsychotic). Moreover, there was considerable evidence of efficacy for each drug individually for the management of ADHD and child aggression. The study sample comprised children (ages 6-12 years) with both diagnosed ADHD and disruptive behavior disorder (oppositional-defiant or conduct disorder) accompanied by severe physical aggression. In a staged sequence, the medication with the least problematic adverse effects (stimulant) was openly titrated in 3 weeks to optimal effect. Participants whose behavioral symptoms were not normalized received additional double-blind medication, either risperidone or placebo, by random assignment. Thus children whose behavioral symptoms were normalized with stimulant medication were not exposed to an antipsychotic. All families participated in an empirically-supported parent training program for disruptive behavior, so that the actual comparison was stimulant+parent training versus stimulant+antipsychotic+parent training. Conclusions We hope that the resolutions of the challenges presented here will be useful to other investigators and facilitate much-needed research on child psychiatric polypharmacy. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00796302

Abstract Background To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQL) and medication satisfaction after switching from a stable dose of oral extended-release methylphenidate (ER-MPH) to methylphenidate transdermal system (MTS) via a dose-transition schedule in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods In a 4-week, multisite, open-label study, 171 children (164 in the intent-to-treat [ITT] population) aged 6-12 years diagnosed with ADHD abruptly switched from a stable dose of oral ER-MPH to MTS nominal dosages of 10, 15, 20, and 30 mg using a predefined dose-transition schedule. Subjects remained on the scheduled dose for the first week, after which the dose was then titrated to an optimal effect. The ADHD Impact Module-Children (AIM-C), a disease-specific validated HRQL survey instrument measuring child and family impact, was used to assess the impact of ADHD symptoms on the lives of children and their families at baseline and study endpoint. Satisfaction with MTS use was assessed via a Medication Satisfaction Survey (MSS) at study endpoint. Both the AIM-C and MSS were completed by a caregiver (parent/legally authorized representative). Tolerability was monitored by spontaneous adverse event (AE) reporting. Results AIM-C child and family HRQL mean scores were above the median possible score at baseline and were further improved at endpoint across all MTS doses. Similar improvements were noted for behavior, missed doses, worry, and economic impact AIM-C item scores. Overall, 93.8% of caregivers indicated a high level of satisfaction with their child's use of the study medication. The majority of treatment-emergent AEs (> 98%) were mild to moderate in intensity, and the most commonly reported AEs included headache, decreased appetite, insomnia, and abdominal pain. Seven subjects discontinued the study due to intolerable AEs (n = 3) and application site reactions (n = 4). Conclusion This study demonstrates that MTS, when carefully titrated to optimal dose, may further improve child and family HRQL, as well as behavioral, medication worry, and economic impact item scores, as measured by the AIM-C in subjects switching to MTS from a stable dose of routinely prescribed oral ER-MPH after a short treatment period. Furthermore, following the abrupt conversion from oral ER-MPH to MTS, the majority of caregivers reported being highly satisfied with MTS as a treatment option for their children with ADHD. Trial Registration NCT00151983

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults occurs at a prevalence rate that is higher than the prevalence of many major psychiatric disorders in adults. Thus, adult patients with ADHD often present with comorbid conditions, each of which alters the course of ADHD, overall treatment recommendations, and symptom response differently. Common ADHD comorbidities include major depressive disorder (MDD), bipolar disorder, and substance use disorders. Algorithms have been developed to aid clinicians in determining which presenting disorder to treat first, and additional studies have helped elucidate which pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments best treat each comorbid disorder without worsening symptoms of another.In this Expert Panel Supplement, David Goodman, MD, discusses the prevalence and diagnostic distinctions between ADHD in adults and depression, including both MDD and dysthymia; Roger McIntyre, MD, FRCPC, reviews the phenomenology, illness progression, and treatment options for patients with ADHD and comorbid bipolar disorder; and Oscar Bukstein, MD, MPH, reviews both background and practical considerations in understanding, evaluating, and treating adults with co-existing substance use disorders and ADHD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To examine the trajectory of methylphenidate (MPH) dosage over time, following a controlled titration, and to ascertain how accurately the titration was able to predict effective long-term treatment in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Method: Using the 14-month-treatment database of the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA), the outcome of the initial placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized daily switch titration of MPH was compared with the subsequent maintenance pharmacotherapy. Children received monthly monitoring visits and, when needed, medication adjustments.Results: Of the 198 children for whom MPH was the optimal treatment at titration (mean +/- SD dose: 30.5 +/- 14.2 mg/day), 88% were still taking MPH at the end of maintenance (mean dose 34.4 +/- 13.3 mg/day). Titration-determined dose and end-of-maintenance dose were significantly correlated (r = 0.52-0.68). Children receiving combined pharmacotherapy and behavioral treatment ended maintenance on a lower dose (31.1 +/- 11.7 mg/day) than did children receiving pharmacotherapy only (38.1 +/- 14.2 mg/day). Of the 230 children for whom titration identified an optimal treatment, 17% continued both the assigned medication and dosage throughout maintenance. The mean number of pharmacological changes per child was 2.8 +/- 1.8 (SD), and time to first change was 4.7 months +/- 0.3 (SE).Conclusions: For most children, initial titration found a dose of MPH in the general range of the effective maintenance dose, but did not prevent the need for subsequent maintenance adjustments. For optimal pharmacological treatment of ADHD, both careful initial titration and ongoing medication management are needed. INSET: Effectiveness of Treatments for..., by Michael J. Maloney. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Results of the NIMH Collaborative Multisite Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (MTA) were analyzed to determine whether a double-blind, placebo-controlled methylphenidate (MPH) titration trial identified the best MPH dose for each child with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Method: Children with ADHD assigned to MTA medication treatment groups (n = 289) underwent a controlled 28-day titration protocol that administered different MPH doses (placebo, low, middle, and high) on successive days.Results: A repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed main effects for MPH dose with greater effects on teacher ratings of impairment and deportment (F3 = 100.6, n = 223, p = .0001; effect sizes 0.8-1.3) than on parent ratings of similar endpoints (F3 = 55.61, n = 253, p = .00001; effect sizes 0.4-0.6). Dose did not interact with period, dose order, comorbid diagnosis, site, or treatment group.Conclusions: The MTA titration protocol validated the efficacy of weekend MPH dosing and established a total daily dose limit of 35 mg of MPH for children weighing less than 25 kg. It replicated previously reported MPH response rates (77%), distribution of best doses (10-50 mg/day) across subjects, effect sizes on impairment and deportment, as well as dose-related adverse events. INSET: Media Violence, by Michael J. Maloney. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Study goals were to (1) provide a rationale for developing a composite primary outcome score that includes symptom severity for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and emotional dysregulation, plus symptom-induced impairment; (2) demonstrate weighting methods to calculate the composite score using a sample of children diagnosed with ADHD and aggression; and (3) identify the optimal weighting method most sensitive to change, as measured by effect sizes. Methods: We conducted secondary data analyses from the previously conducted Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study. Children aged 6-12 years were recruited through academic medical centers or community referrals. The composite primary outcome comprised the ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, disruptive mood dysregulation disorder, and peer conflict subscales from the Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory (CASI), a DSM ( Diagnostic and Statistical Manual )-referenced rating scale of symptom severity and symptom-induced impairment. Five weighting methods were tested based on input from senior statisticians. Results: The composite score demonstrated a larger (Cohen's d ) effect size than the individual CASI subscales, irrespective of the weighting method (10%-55% larger). Across all weighting methods, effect sizes were similar and substantial: approximately a two-standard deviation symptom reduction (range: -1.97 to -2.04), highest for equal item and equal subscale weighting, was demonstrated, from baseline to week 9, among all TOSCA participants. The composite score showed a medium positive correlation with the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores, 0.46-0.47 for all weighting methods. Conclusions: A composite score that included severity and impairment ratings of ADHD and emotional dysregulation demonstrated a more robust pre-post change than individual subscales. This composite may be a more useful indicator of clinically relevant improvement in heterogeneous samples with ADHD than single subscales, avoiding some of the statistical limitations associated with multiple comparisons. Among the five similar weighting methods, the two best appear to be the equal item and equal subscale weighting methods.

(Reprinted with permission from Am J Psychiatry 2018; 175:86-90) ., (Copyright © 2019 by the American Psychiatric Association.)

Objective: This trial compared attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment alone, intensive reading intervention alone, and their combination for children with ADHD and word reading difficulties and disabilities (RD)., Method: Children (n = 216; predominantly African American males) in Grades 2-5 with ADHD and word reading/decoding deficits were randomized to ADHD treatment (medication + parent training), reading treatment (reading instruction), or combined ADHD + reading treatment. Outcomes were parent and teacher ADHD ratings and measures of word reading/decoding. Analyses utilized a mixed models covariate-adjusted gain score approach with posttest regressed onto pretest., Results: Inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity outcomes were significantly better in the ADHD (parent Hedges's g = .87/.75; teacher g = .67/.50) and combined (parent g = 1.06/.95; teacher g = .36/41) treatment groups than reading treatment alone; the ADHD and Combined groups did not differ significantly (parent g = .19/.20; teacher g = .31/.09). Word reading and decoding outcomes were significantly better in the reading (word reading g = .23; decoding g = .39) and combined (word reading g = .32; decoding g = .39) treatment groups than ADHD treatment alone; reading and combined groups did not differ (word reading g = .09; decoding g = .00). Significant group differences were maintained at the 3- to 5-month follow-up on all outcomes except word reading., Conclusions: Children with ADHD and RD benefit from specific treatment of each disorder. ADHD treatment is associated with more improvement in ADHD symptoms than RD treatment, and reading instruction is associated with better word reading and decoding outcomes than ADHD treatment. The additive value of combining treatments was not significant within disorder, but the combination allows treating both disorders simultaneously. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).)

This study explored the nature of interactions between adolescent males with ADHD and their mothers, and the effects of methylphenidate (MPH) on an analogue parent-teen interaction task. Twenty-five adolescent males with ADHD ( M = 13.6 years) and their mothers and 14 non-ADHD adolescent males ( M = 13.4 years) and their mothers completed ratings of perceived dyadic conflict. Behavioral observations of dyads during 10-min conflict-resolution tasks were also collected. The ADHD dyads completed these tasks twice, with adolescents receiving either 0.3 mg/kg MPH or placebo. Videotaped sessions were coded using the Parent-Adolescent Interaction Rating Scale. Following the conflict-resolution task, participants rated their perceived conflict and affect during the interaction. Findings indicated higher conflict in the ADHD dyads, and minimal MPH effects on parent-teen interactions during the analogue task. Results suggest that stimulant medication does not produce meaningful acute effects on parent-teen interactions.

Objective: Stimulant medication is an efficacious and first-line approach to treating ADHD in adolescence. However, less is known about the effectiveness of this approach as a treatment in real-world settings. The complicated nature of the secondary school environment and documented adolescent nonadherence with stimulant medication may undermine the exportability of this approach., Method: This study investigates stimulant medication effectiveness and adherence in a sample of adolescents with ADHD who were observed in their natural secondary school environment., Results: Results indicated that the effect of stimulant medication on adolescent functioning is smaller in naturalistic settings than in previous analogue studies. Long-acting pemoline produced greater adherence than the short-acting methylphenidate (MPH), but parents and adolescents preferred the short-acting MPH., Conclusions: Overall, adolescents reported very low satisfaction with stimulant medication. Findings are discussed.

Objective: Although a number of studies demonstrate that children with ADHD do not attribute their behavior to taking medication, it remains unstudied whether adolescents, who have a longer history of taking medication for ADHD, show performance attributions to medication., Method: A sample of 46 adolescents completed daily attributions for success or failure as a part of their participation in a summer treatment program with a double-blind, placebo-controlled assessment of methylphenidate., Results: Results demonstrated that adolescents with ADHD did not reliably discern active medication from placebo, rarely attributed their performance to the pill, and showed no differences in attributional style as a function of medication status., Conclusion: These data indicate that adolescents with ADHD may possess inaccurate beliefs about the effect of stimulant medication on their behavior.

Aggressive behaviors can be classified into proactive and reactive functions, though there is disagreement about whether these are distinct constructs. Data suggest that proactive and reactive aggression have different etiologies, correlates, and response to treatment. Several rating scales are available to characterize aggressive behavior as proactive or reactive; one commonly used scale was originally developed for teacher ratings, referred to here as the Antisocial Behavior Scale (ABS). However, no data are available on the psychometric properties of the ABS for parent ratings. This study examined the factor structure and convergent/divergent validity of the parent-rated ABS among 168 children aged 6-12 years with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, a disruptive behavior disorder, and severe aggression enrolled in a randomized clinical trial. Multidimensional item response theory was used to confirm the original factor structure. The proactive and reactive factors were distinct but moderately correlated; the algorithm items exhibited acceptable fit on the original factors. The non-algorithm items caused theoretical problems and model misfit. Convergent and divergent validity of the scale was explored between the ABS and other parent-report measures. Proactive and reactive aggression showed differential correlates consistent with expectations for externalizing symptoms. The subscales were correlated weakly or not at all with most non-externalizing symptoms, with some exceptions. Thus, the original factor structure was supported and we found preliminary evidence for the validity of the scale, though the results suggest that the constructs measured by the ABS may not be totally distinct from general behavior problems in this clinical sample.

Objective: In this study, we evaluated parent and child characteristics as predictors and moderators of response in the four-site Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study., Methods: A total of 168 children with severe aggression, disruptive behavior disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were enrolled in a 9-week trial of basic treatment (n=84, stimulant+parent training+placebo) versus augmented treatment (n=84, stimulant+parent training+risperidone). In the initial report, augmented treatment surpassed basic treatment in reducing the primary outcome of disruptive behavior (D-Total) scores. In the current study, we evaluated parent (income, education, family functioning, employment) and child variables (intelligence quotient [IQ], aggression type, comorbid symptomatology) as predictors or moderators, using linear mixed models and the MacArthur guidelines., Results: Higher scores on ADHD symptom severity and callous/unemotional traits predicted better outcome on D-Total regardless of treatment assignment. Two moderators of D-Total were found: Higher anger/irritability symptoms and lower mania scores were associated with faster response, although not better overall effect at endpoint, in the augmented but not the basic group. Several variables moderated response on secondary outcomes (ADHD severity and prosocial behavior), and were characterized by faster response, although not better outcome, in the augmented but not in the basic group. Maternal education moderated outcome on the measure of positive social behavior; children of mothers with less education benefited more from augmented treatment relative to basic than those with more education., Conclusion: Although these findings require validation, they tentatively suggest that augmented treatment works equally well across the entire sample. Nevertheless, certain child characteristics may be useful indicators for the speed of response to augmented treatment.

Objective: In the four-site Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (TOSCA) study, addition of risperidone to stimulant and parent training moderately improved parent-rated disruptive behavior disorder (DBD) symptoms. This secondary study explores outcomes other than DBD and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as measured by the Child and Adolescent Symptom Inventory-4R (CASI-4R)., Methods: A total of 168 children ages 6-12 with severe aggression (physical harm), DBD, and ADHD were randomized to parent training plus stimulant plus placebo (basic treatment) or parent training plus stimulant plus risperidone (augmented treatment) for 9 weeks. All received only parent training plus stimulant for the first 3 weeks, then those with room for improvement received a second drug (placebo or risperidone) for 6 weeks. CASI-4R category item means at baseline and week 9 were entered into linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures to evaluate group differences in changes. Mediation of the primary DBD outcome was explored., Results: Parent ratings were nonsignificant with small/negligible effects, but teacher ratings (n=46 with complete data) showed significant augmented treatment advantage for symptoms of anxiety (p=0.013, d=0.71), schizophrenia spectrum (p=0.017, d=0.45), and impairment in these domains (p=0.02, d=0.26), all remaining significant after false discovery rate correction for multiple tests. Improvement in teacher-rated anxiety significantly (p=0.001) mediated the effect of risperidone augmentation on the primary outcome, the Disruptive-total of the parent-rated Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form., Conclusions: Addition of risperidone to parent training plus stimulant improves not only parent-rated DBD as previously reported, but also teacher-rated anxiety-social avoidance. Improvement in anxiety mediates improvement in DBD, suggesting anxiety-driven fight-or-flight disruptive behavior with aggression, with implications for potential treatment strategies. Clinicians should attend to possible anxiety in children presenting with aggression and DBD., Clinical Trial Registry: Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression (The TOSCA Study). NCT00796302. clinicaltrials.gov.

Objective: In this post hoc analysis, we assessed whether guanfacine extended-release (GXR) adjunctive to a psychostimulant resulted in greater response and remission rates than placebo + psychostimulant in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)., Method: In this 9-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-optimization study, participants (N = 461) aged 6 to 17 years with suboptimal response to psychostimulants were randomized to GXR on awakening (AM) + psychostimulant, GXR at bedtime (PM) + psychostimulant, or placebo + psychostimulant., Results: At the final on-treatment assessment, more participants in both GXR + psychostimulant groups versus the placebo + psychostimulant group achieved response as assessed by 2 criteria: reduction from baseline in ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total score (1) ≥40% (GXR AM + psychostimulant = 69.8%, GXR PM + psychostimulant = 70.3%, versus placebo + psychostimulant = 57.9%; p = .032 and p = .026, respectively), or (2) ≥50% (63.1%, 64.9%, versus 43.4%; p <.001 for both). Results were similar for symptomatic remission (ADHD-RS-IV total score ≤18; 61.1%, 62.2%, versus 46.1%; p = .010 and p = .005, respectively) and syndromal remission (symptomatic remission plus Clinical Global Impressions of Severity of Illness score ≤2). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in participants receiving GXR + psychostimulant were headache (21.2%) and somnolence (13.6%)., Conclusion: GXR + psychostimulant treatment resulted in a greater percentage of participants meeting stringent criteria for response and remission compared with placebo + psychostimulant. The adverse event profile of adjunctive therapy was consistent with known effects of either treatment alone. Clinical trial registration information-Efficacy and Safety of SPD503 in Combination With Psychostimulants; http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00734578., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To examine efficacy, tolerability, and safety of guanfacine extended release (GXR; ≤4 mg/d) adjunctive to a long-acting psychostimulant for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents 6 to 17 years of age with suboptimal, but partial, response to psychostimulant alone., Method: In this multicenter, 9-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-optimization study, subjects (N = 461) continued their stable dose of psychostimulant given in the morning and were randomized to receive GXR in the morning (GXR AM), GXR in the evening (GXR PM), or placebo. Efficacy measures included ADHD Rating Scale IV (ADHD-RS-IV) and Clinical Global Impressions of Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Safety measures included adverse events (AEs), vital signs, electrocardiograms, and laboratory evaluations., Results: At endpoint, GXR treatment groups showed significantly greater improvement from baseline ADHD-RS-IV total scores compared with placebo plus psychostimulant (GXR AM, p = .002; GXR PM, p < .001). Significant benefits of GXR treatment versus placebo plus psychostimulant were observed on the CGI-S (GXR AM, p = .013; GXR PM, p < .001) and CGI-I (GXR AM, p = .024; GXR PM, p = .003). At endpoint, small mean decreases in pulse, systolic, and diastolic blood pressure were observed in GXR treatment groups versus placebo plus psychostimulant. No new safety signals emerged following administration of GXR with psychostimulants versus psychostimulants alone. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity., Conclusions: Morning or evening GXR administered adjunctively to a psychostimulant showed significantly greater improvement over placebo plus psychostimulant in ADHD symptoms and generated no new safety signals. Clinical trial registration information-Efficacy and Safety of SPD503 in Combination With Psychostimulants; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00734578., (Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The study examined whether psychosocial intervention for children diagnosed with a disruptive behavior disorder (DBD; n = 84) changed concentrations of cortisol and testosterone across a 3-year follow-up when compared to a matched, nonclinical, healthy comparison (HC; n = 69) group. Boys and girls (6-11 years) with a DBD were randomly assigned to one of two arms of a multimethod intervention. Hierarchical linear modeling revealed that children undergoing psychosocial intervention for a DBD experienced a significant decline in diurnal cortisol change over time (p < .05) when compared to the HC condition. Boys with a DBD diagnosis had significantly lower mean cortisol concentrations prior to treatment (p < .05) and showed a significantly steeper increase in mean cortisol over time (p < .05) when compared to HC boys. Treatment effects for diurnal cortisol change were replicated in the boys-only analysis. No treatment effects were noted for testosterone in either analysis.

This Practice Parameter reviews the evidence from research and clinical experience and highlights significant advances in the assessment and treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder since the previous Parameter was published in 1998. It highlights the importance of early identification of posttraumatic stress disorder, the importance of gathering information from parents and children, and the assessment and treatment of comorbid disorders. It presents evidence to support trauma-focused psychotherapy, medications, and a combination of interventions in a multimodal approach.

Objective: To evaluate symptom control and tolerability after abrupt conversion from oral extended-release methylphenidate (ER-MPH) to methylphenidate transdermal system (MTS) via a dose-transition schedule in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)., Methods: In a 4-week, prospective, multisite, open-label study, 171 children (164 intent-to-treat) with diagnosed ADHD aged 6-12 years abruptly switched from a stable dose of oral ER-MPH to MTS in nominal dosages of 10, 15, 20, and 30 mg using a predefined dose-transition schedule. After the first week on the scheduled dose, the dose was titrated to optimal effect. The primary effectiveness outcome was the change from baseline (while taking ER-MPH) to week 4 in ADHD-Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) total scores. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed throughout the study., Results: Most subjects (58%) remained on the initial MTS dose defined by the dose-transition schedule; 38% increased and 4% decreased their MTS dose for optimization. MTS dose optimization resulted in significantly better ADHD-RS-IV total (mean +/- SD) scores at week 4 than at baseline (9.9 +/- 7.47 vs. 14.1 +/- 7.48; p < 0.0001). The most commonly reported AEs included headache, decreased appetite, insomnia, and upper abdominal pain. Four subjects (2.3%) discontinued because of application site reactions and three discontinued because of other AEs., Conclusions: Abrupt conversion from a stable dose of oral ER-MPH to MTS was accomplished using a predefined dose-transition schedule without loss of symptom control; however, careful titration to optimal dose is recommended. Most AEs were mild to moderate and, with the exception of application site reactions, were similar to AEs typically observed with oral MPH. Limitations of this study included its open-label sequential design without placebo, which could result in spurious attribution of improvement to the study treatment and precluded superiority determinations of MTS over baseline ER-MPH treatment. The apparent superiority of MTS was likely due to more careful titration and clinical monitoring rather than the product itself. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00151983.

Objective: To examine the course of depression during the treatment of adolescents with depression who had recently attempted suicide., Method: Adolescents (N = 124), ages 12 to 18 years, with a 90-day history of suicide attempt, a current diagnosis of depressive disorder (96.0% had major depressive disorder), and a Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score of 36 or higher, entered a 6-month treatment with antidepressant medication, cognitive-behavioral therapy focused on suicide prevention, or their combination (Comb), at five academic sites. Treatment assignment could be either random or chosen by study participants. Intent-to-treat, mixed effects regression models of depression and other relevant ratings were estimated. Improvement and remission rates were computed with the last observation carried forward., Results: Most patients (n = 104 or 84%) chose treatment assignment, and overall, three fourths (n = 93) received Comb. In Comb, CDRS-R declined from a baseline adjusted mean of 49.6 (SD 12.3) to 38.3 (8.0) at week 12 and to 27.0 (10.1) at week 24 (p < .0001), with a Clinical Global Impression -defined improvement rate of 58.0% at week 12 and 72.2% at week 24 and a remission (CDRS-R ≤ 28) rate of 32.5% at week 12 and 50.0% at week 24. The CDRS-R and the Scale for Suicidal Ideation scores were correlated at baseline (r = 0.43, p < .0001) and declined in parallel., Conclusions: When vigorously treated with a combination of medication and psychotherapy, adolescents with depression who have recently attempted suicide show rates of improvement and remission of depression that seem comparable to those observed in nonsuicidal adolescents with depression., (Copyright © 2009 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To identify the predictors of suicidal events and attempts in adolescent suicide attempters with depression treated in an open treatment trial., Method: Adolescents who had made a recent suicide attempt and had unipolar depression (n =124) were either randomized (n = 22) or given a choice (n = 102) among three conditions. Two participants withdrew before treatment assignment. The remaining 124 youths received a specialized psychotherapy for suicide attempting adolescents (n = 17), a medication algorithm (n = 14), or the combination (n = 93). The participants were followed up 6 months after intake with respect to rate, timing, and predictors of a suicidal event (attempt or acute suicidal ideation necessitating emergency referral)., Results: The morbid risks of suicidal events and attempts on 6-month follow-up were 0.19 and 0.12, respectively, with a median time to event of 44 days. Higher self-rated depression, suicidal ideation, family income, greater number of previous suicide attempts, lower maximum lethality of previous attempt, history of sexual abuse, and lower family cohesion predicted the occurrence, and earlier time to event, with similar findings for the outcome of attempts. A slower decline in suicidal ideation was associated with the occurrence of a suicidal event., Conclusions: In this open trial, the 6-month morbid risks for suicidal events and for reattempts were lower than those in other comparable samples, suggesting that this intervention should be studied further. Important treatment targets include suicidal ideation, family cohesion, and sequelae of previous abuse. Because 40% of events occurred with 4 weeks of intake, an emphasis on safety planning and increased therapeutic contact early in treatment may be warranted.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effect on family quality of life (QOL) of clonidine (CLON) and methylphenidate (MPH), used alone and in combination, in treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)., Methods: Two proxy QOL measures were used in a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled 16-week trial of 122 children, ages 7-12 years, with ADHD. Children were randomized to one of four groups in which they received MPH, CLON, a combination of drugs, or placebo. QOL was measured with the Daily Hassles Scale and the Impact on Family Scale at baseline and at 16 weeks., Results: In a general linear model repeated measures analysis, treatment groups improved over a 16-week period compared to placebo for Daily Hassles and Impact on Family, as well as in symptoms measured by the ADHD Rating Scale. QOL measures correlated moderately with efficacy and symptom measures., Conclusion: This study provides evidence that measures of QOL for the family are sensitive to pharmacological treatment of ADHD. The correlation pattern of the QOL measures with symptom and efficacy variables supported family QOL as a related but separate construct. Clonidine for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment Study (CAT) Trial Registry Name: Clinicaltrials.gov; ID Number, NCT00031395; URL, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00031395?order=8/ .

This practice parameter describes the psychiatric assessment and management of physically ill children and adolescents. It reviews the epidemiology, clinical presentation, assessment, and treatment of psychiatric symptoms in children and adolescents with physical illnesses and the environmental and social influences that can affect patient outcome.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and substance use disorders are commonly observed together, particularly in clinical populations of adolescents. The co-occurrence of these problems is common and presents challenges for the clinician in assessment and management. This article will review the extent of the problem, the relationship in terms of risk and prognosis, and management issues, including the use of stimulant and nonstimulant medications and the risk of abuse, misuse, and diversion.

Attention deficit hperactivity disorder (ADHD) is highly prevalent among adolescents who have substance use disorder (SUD). Several lines of evidence, although not conclusive, suggest that ADHD might have an independent effect on SUD liability. It is still to be determined, however, whether this association is mediated by conduct disorder. This article reviews ADHD and SUD.

Substance use disorder (SUD) is a common comorbidity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) that is frequently seen during adolescence. Physicians who treat patients with ADHD need to be aware of both the behavioral and medical signs of substance abuse and closely screen their patients for SUD. Optimal treatment of the symptoms of ADHD is the most effective way to reduce the incidence of SUD, but the use of stimulants, the first-line therapy for ADHD, is associated with an appreciable degree of abuse and misuse of therapeutic drugs. Cardiovascular and psychiatric risks with ADHD drugs have resulted in recent labeling changes for these drugs. A correct diagnosis of ADHD is important in validating the use of stimulant medication. New strategies for effectively treating ADHD that may minimize the risk for drug abuse are being developed and include extended-release formulations of currently used drugs, new nonstimulant drugs for the treatment of ADHD, and novel prodrugs that optimize therapeutic plasma concentrations of drugs. Nonmedication or psychosocial treatments, especially for adult ADHD, are also available. Further assessment of these strategies should permit the development of new approaches to the treatment of ADHD that reduce the risk for abuse and misuse of stimulant medications.

This practice parameter describes the epidemiology, clinical picture, differential diagnosis, course, risk factors, and pharmacological and psychotherapy treatments of children and adolescents with major depressive or dysthymic disorders. Side effects of the antidepressants, particularly the risk of suicidal ideation and behaviors are discussed. Recommendations regarding the assessment and the acute, continuation, and maintenance treatment of these disorders are based on the existent scientific evidence as well as the current clinical practice.

Aims: This study aims at evaluating the association between attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and illicit substance use disorders (SUD) (marijuana, cocaine and inhalants), controlling for the association with conduct disorder (CD), in a community-based sample of adolescents., Design: Case-control, community-based study., Setting: A delimited geographical area in the South of Brazil, served by four public health clinics., Participants: A total of 968 male adolescents (15-20 years of age) were screened for SUD in their households. Of the subjects who were screened positive, we selected 61 cases with illicit SUD. For each case we selected, from the group which was screened negative, three controls without illicit or alcohol SUD, matched by age and proximity with the case's household., Measurements: The screening instrument was the Alcohol Smoking and Substance Screening Test (ASSIST). SUD diagnoses were assessed by the drug section of the Mini International Neuropsychiatry Interview (MINI). Other psychiatric diagnoses were based on semistructured (Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-epidemiological version; MINI) and clinical interviews., Findings: Adolescents with ADHD presented a significantly higher odds ratio (OR) for illicit SUD than youths without ADHD, even after adjusting for potential confounders (CD, ethnicity, religion and estimated IQ) (OR = 9.12; 95% CI = 2.84-29.31, P < 0.01)., Conclusions: Our results suggest an association between ADHD and illicit SUD in Brazilian adolescents that is not mediated by CD. These findings are potentially important from a prevention perspective because treatments are available for ADHD.

This 8-week, open-label extension of a double-blind study reports on safety data for 171 adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who received once-daily OROS methylphenidate (MPH) (18-72 mg/day). Headache, anorexia, and insomnia were the most frequently reported treatment-related adverse events. The incidence of adverse events was not related to dose. OROS MPH was safe and well tolerated at doses up to 72 mg/day.

Background: Despite the persistence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) into adolescence, little is known about the efficacy and tolerability of stimulant medications in this age group., Objective: To report the results of a multisite controlled study among adolescents with ADHD evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of osmotic-release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate., Design: Adolescents (N = 220) having a confirmed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition diagnosis of ADHD underwent dose titration to identify dosages of OROS methylphenidate that improved symptoms to predefined criteria. Subjects successfully completing the dose titration phase (n = 177) (ie, tolerated and responded to treatment and adhered to the protocol) were randomized to receive 2 weeks' treatment with their individualized dosage of OROS methylphenidate (18, 36, 54, or 72 mg once daily) or placebo. Treatment effectiveness was measured using investigator, parent, and adolescent assessments of ADHD., Results: A significant reduction from baseline in the investigator-rated ADHD Rating Scale, the primary efficacy measure, was found with OROS methylphenidate treatment compared with placebo. Similar findings were noted with parent- and adolescent-report measures. Based on a Clinical Global Impression improvement subscale score of much or very much improved, 52% of subjects in the OROS methylphenidate group improved compared with 31% receiving placebo. Thirty-seven percent of subjects required the maximum dosage of 72 mg/d. The incidence of drug-related adverse events was similar between the 2 study groups., Conclusion: In adolescents, once-daily OROS methylphenidate significantly reduced ADHD symptoms and was well tolerated using dosages up to 72 mg/d.

Objective: This study examined the effectiveness of stimulant medication on multiple domains of functioning in 36 young (5 to 6 years old) children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)., Method: Five- and 6-year-old children attending a summer treatment program between 1987 and 1997 underwent a randomized clinical assessment of the effect of two doses of methylphenidate (0.3 mg/kg versus 0.6 mg/kg) and placebo on social behavior and academic performance., Results: Methylphenidate had an effect on all four social behaviors and improved two of the three areas of academic functioning. Dose effects were present for three of the seven dependent measures. Individual analyses indicated a therapeutic response rate between 39% and 100% across dependent measures. Furthermore, individual analyses of response indicated that across several important dependent measures, 39% to 98% of children showed little incremental improvement with the higher dose compared with the lower dose of stimulant medication., Conclusions: Stimulant medication is an effective treatment for young children diagnosed with ADHD; however, multiple domains of functioning must be assessed to determine the most effective dose for young children with ADHD.