Search

Peer reviewed: True, Autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are common behaviourally diagnosed conditions. One of the key aspects of diagnosis is clinical judgement. Yet despite decades of research, it is only in recent times that researchers have started exploring clinicians' perspectives on diagnosing these conditions. We aimed to add to this body of knowledge by conducting interviews with 17 experienced health care professionals in the United Kingdom to hear their perspectives on diagnosing autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Clinicians reflected that for some children and young people, diagnosis is reasonably straightforward; however, in other situations, decisions are made on more pragmatic grounds (i.e. will this be helpful). We identified some differences of opinion between professionals and organisation which adds to the complexity of applying a diagnosis. We recommend several areas for future research and point to some practical and philosophical implications of the work.

ObjectivePrevious work has raised questions about the role of general practitioners (GPs) in the identification of neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism spectrum disorders (autism) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders (ADHD). This study aimed to explore how GPs identify these conditions in practice and their perspectives on recent changes to local referral pathways that mean referrals to the neurodevelopmental team come through educational professionals and health visitors, rather than GPs. This study also aimed to explore Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) specialist’s perspectives on the role of GPs.SettingGP practices, local neurodevelopmental services and specialist CAMHS services in the UK.Participants: semistructured interviews were conducted with GPs (n=8), specialists in local CAMHS (n=7), and professionals at national CAMHS services around the country (n=10). Interviews were conducted between January and May 2019. A framework approach informed by thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.ResultsGPs drew on various forms of tacit and explicit information including behavioural markers, parental report, prior knowledge of the family, expert and lay resources. Opinions varied between GPs regarding changes to the referral pathway, with some accepting the changes and others describing it as a ‘disaster’. CAMHS specialists tended to feel that GPs required more neurodevelopmental training and time to conduct consultations.ConclusionThis study adds to the literature showing that GPs use an array of information sources when making referral decisions for autism and ADHD. Further work is urgently required to evaluate the impact of reconfiguring neurodevelopmental referral pathways such that GPs have a diminished role in identification.

Many healthcare systems are organised such that General Practitioners (GPs) often have a key role in identifying autism spectrum disorders (hereafter collectively referred to as autism) in children. In this review, we explored what GPs know about autism and the factors that influence their ability to identify and manage care for their patients with autism in practice. We conducted a systematic narrative review using eight electronic databases. These included Embase and MEDLINE via Ovid, Web of Knowledge, PsycINFO via Ebscohost, PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis, and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) via ProQuest. Our search yielded 2,743 citations. Primary research studies were included, and we did not impose any geographical, language or date restrictions. We identified 17 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Studies included in the review were conducted between 2003 and 2019. We thematically synthesised the material and identified the following themes: the prototypical image of a child with autism; experience, sources of information, and managing care; barriers to identification; strategies to aid in identification; and characteristics that facilitate expertise. Together, the findings from this review present a mixed picture of GP knowledge and experiences in identifying autism and managing care for children with the condition. At one end of the continuum, there were GPs who had not heard of autism or endorsed outmoded aetiological theories. Others, however, demonstrated a sound knowledge of the conditions but had limited confidence in their ability to identify the condition. Many GPs and researchers alike called for more training and this might be effective. However, framing the problem as one of a lack of training risks silences the array of organisational factors that impact on a GP's ability to provide care for these patients.

Children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and disinhibited and reactive attachment disorders (RAD/DAD) often experience socioemotional problems. Elucidating a clear picture of these profiles is essential. Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaires (SDQs) were analysed from cohort of children with ASD (n = 1430), ADHD (n = 1193), and RAD/DAD (n = 39). Kruskal–Wallis Tests and network analytic techniques were used to investigate symptom profiles. Children with ASD experienced more emotional problems, peer problems and fewer prosocial behaviours. Children with ADHD and RAD/DAD had higher levels of hyperactivity and conduct problems. Overall, ASD and ADHD networks were highly correlated (rs = 0.82), and we did not observe a statistically significant difference in terms of global Strength.

Objectives“Attachment difficulties” is an umbrella term often used to describe various forms of non-secure attachment. Differentiating “attachment difficulties” from autism spectrum disorder (hereafter autism) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been characterized as challenging. Few studies have explored how this happens in practice, from the perspective of professionals.DesignQualitative study.MethodsWe conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with (n= 17) healthcare professionals from five NHS Foundation Trusts in the United Kingdom. Participants were recruited using a combination of snowballing, convenience and purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using a thematic approach.ResultsWe identified six interrelated themes that might reflect difficulties with differential conceptualization. These include: a clinical lexicon of attachment; approaching attachment with caution; contextual factors; perceived characteristic behaviors; assessing attachment and adjacent supports; spotlighting intervention and dual conceptualization.ConclusionOur results indicate some of the ways suspicions around attachment are raised in practice. We advocate for more dialogue between research and practice communities on issues of differential conceptualization. We call for collaboration between a panel of experts consisting of attachment and neurodevelopmental orientated practitioners and researchers, to clarify issues around differentiating between attachment difficulties, ASD, and ADHD.

Attachment concepts are used in diverging ways, which has caused confusion in communication among researchers, among practitioners, and between researchers and practitioners, and hinders their potential for collaboration. In this essay we explore how attachment concepts may vary in meaning across six different domains: popular discourses, developmental science, social psychological science, psychiatric diagnosis, psychotherapy, and child welfare practice. We attempt to typify these forms of attachment discourse by highlighting points of convergence, divergence, and relay between the different domains. Our general conclusions are that diversity in the use of attachment concepts across different domains of application has been largely unrecognised, and that recognition of these differences would reduce confusion, help identify sites where infrastructure needs to be developed to support coordination, and strengthen opportunities for collaboration to mutual benefit. We suggest that academic attachment discourse would benefit from clarification of core terminology, including: “attachment”, “internal working model”, “trauma”, and “dysregulation”.

It is well-known that people with an intellectual disability often face a host of health inequalities and co-morbidities. These include childhood obesity, mental health problems, and challenging behaviour. People with an intellectual disability also have reduced life expectancy. GPs are uniquely placed to advocate for and signpost these patients, ensuring they have access to appropriate support. However, it is often unclear what resources are, in reality, both available and beneficial. Here we aim to summarise some of the common inequalities and complexities when working with patients with an intellectual disability and provide an overview of some potentially helpful services.

Distinguishing autism spectrum behaviours from behaviours relating to disorganised attachment can be challenging. There is, for instance, a notable overlap between both conditions in terms of behaviours deemed stereotypical. In addition, there are also similarities regarding some atypical social overtures. Responding to this overlap has been the subject for much debate in the literature. Disorganised attachment was first introduced and conceptualised by the attachment researcher, Mary Main. Main is considered the leading authority on coding this phenomenon. During the course of archival research, we obtained Main’s notes on coding attachment in a group of fifteen children with autism spectrum conditions (hereafter ASC). Drawing on these texts, this paper explores Main’s reasoning when making distinctions between ASC and attachment at the behavioural level. Our approach is informed by Chang’s (2017) argument for the potential of “history as complementary science. Analysis indicate that, for Main, frequency and timing was an important differential factor when attributing a behaviour to either ASC or the child’s attachment pattern., The authors wish to thank the Wellcome Trust [Grant WT103343MA] and the NIHR School of Primary Care Research [RG94577]