Search

Selective mutism (SM) is an anxiety disorder (prevalence 1–2%), characterized by the consistent absence of speaking in specific situations (e.g., in school), while adequately speaking in other situations (e.g., at home). SM can have a debilitating impact on the psychosocial and academic functioning in childhood. The use of psychometrically sound and cross-culturally valid instruments is urgently needed. The aim of this paper is to identify and review the available assessment instruments for screening or diagnosing the core SM symptomatology. We conducted a systematic search in 6 databases. We identified 1469 studies from the last decade and investigated the measures having been used in a diagnostic assessment of SM. Studies were included if original data on the assessment or treatment of SM were reported. It was found that 38% of published studies on SM reporting original data did not report the use of any standardized or objective measure to investigate the core symptomatology. The results showed that many different questionnaires, interviews and observational instruments were used, many of these only once. The Selective Mutism Questionnaire (SMQ), Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule (ADIS) and School Speech Questionnaire (SSQ) were used most often. Psychometric data on these instruments are emerging. Beyond these commonly used instruments, more recent developed instruments, such as the Frankfurt Scale of SM (FSSM) and the Teacher Telephone Interview for SM (TTI-SM), are described, as well as several interesting observational measures. The strengths and weaknesses of the instruments are discussed and recommendations are made for their use in clinical practice and research.

Physical injury and illness are common potentially traumatic events during childhood and adolescence. Many children experience psychosocial difficulties after medical events. The sample consisted of 399 children aged 4 to 15 who had been hospitalized for physical illness or injury. Elevated psychological symptomatology (PTSS, depression, anxiety) was more frequent after multiple (type II) compared to single (type I) medical events, but only a few differences were statistically significant. The strongest risk factor of child PTSS was parental stress. Type II trauma and low parental education were significant risk factors only for parent report of child PTSS (not for child report). The analyzed risk factors did not differ for type I versus II trauma. We recommend standardized screening and monitoring for mental health in the standard pediatric health care. Furthermore, pediatricians should be trained in signaling stress signs of parents.

Aims: Medical procedures and hospitalizations can be experienced as traumatic and can lead to post-traumatic stress reactions. Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) shows promising results but very few long-term studies have been published. Therefore, our aim was to test the long-term (8 months post-treatment) effectiveness of EMDR in children and adolescents with medically related subthreshold post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Methods and results: Seventy-four children (including 39 with congenital or acquired heart disease) aged 4-15 (M = 9.6 years) with subthreshold PTSD after previous hospitalization were included into a parallel group randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to EMDR (n = 37) or care-as-usual (CAU) (n = 37; medical care only). The primary outcome was PTSD symptoms of the child. Secondary outcomes were symptoms of depression and blood-injection-injury (BII) phobia, sleep problems, and health-related quality of life (HrQoL) of the child. Assessments of all outcomes were planned at baseline and 8 weeks and 8 months after the start of EMDR/CAU. We hypothesized that the EMDR group would show significantly more improvements on all outcomes over time. Both groups showed improvements over time on child's symptoms of PTSD (only parent report), depression, BII phobia, sleep problems, and most HrQoL subscales. GEE analyses showed no significant differences between the EMDR group (nT2 = 33, nT3 = 30) and the CAU group (nT2 = 35, nT3 = 32) on the primary outcome. One superior effect of EMDR over time was found for reducing parent-reported BII phobia of the child. Conclusion: EMDR did not perform better than CAU in reducing subthreshold PTSD up to 8 months post-treatment in previously hospitalized children. Possible explanations and clinical implications are discussed.