Search

Symptom rating sheets completed by psychiatrists over a 9-year period on 2602 intellectually normal child and adolescent clinic attenders were subjected to factor analysis (principal components). Two types of factor sets were derived, one for younger subjects (3-11 years) and another for older subjects (12-18). Both had three factors in common: conduct disturbance, relationship problems and emotionality, but differed on the fourth-developmental immaturity for the younger group, depression for the older. A factor solution was also derived for the whole clinic sample with three scales: conduct, emotionality and immaturity. Both types of factor solutions were subjected to MANOVA for age and sex effects, both of which proved to be of significant influence. Good correspondence was found between the symptom factors identified and conceptually similar clinical diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sixty boys, aged from 6 to 10 years, were studied after their referral to psychiatric clinics for antisocial or disruptive behaviour. Their scores on reliable measures of hyperactivity, defiant behaviour, emotional disorder and attention deficit were taken for the home, school and clinic settings; and subjected to two techniques of cluster analysis. Both gave a similar set of clusters, one of which had high scores on all measures of hyperactivity and attention deficit. Membership of this cluster was associated with a lower IQ, a younger age of problem onset and referral, an abnormal neurological examination, a history of developmental delay, smaller family size, poor peer relationships and a high rate of accidental injuries; and it predicted a good response to stimulant medication in a controlled trial. Other research on the classification of hyperactivity is discussed, and proposals are made for the criteria of a rather narrow definition of 'hyperkinetic conduct disorder'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The distinction between hyperactivity and conduct disorder was explored in a mixed group of 64 children referred to psychiatric clinics because of antisocial or disruptive behaviour. A semi-structured interview measure (the Parental Account of Children's Symptoms, PACS) proved to have adequate inter-rater reliability, internal consistency and factorial validity. The PACS scales of defiance and hyperactivity, and similar subscales from Conners' Teacher Rating Scale, were tested against laboratory and clinical measures of activity, attention, cognitive performance, psychosocial background and family relationships. The hyperactivity (but not the defiance) scales were associated with greater activity, younger age, poorer cognitive performance and abnormalities on a developmental neurological examination. The defiance (but not the hyperactivity) scales were associated with impairment of family relationships and adverse social factors. It was concluded that a dimension of inattentive, restless activity should be separated from one of antisocial, defiant conduct in children with psychiatric disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The diagnosis of hyperkinetic syndrome is rarely used in the UK, in marked contrast to its counterpart in the USA. Most of the work on hyperkinesis is concerned with the North American concept and relatively little attention has been paid to the British approach. The present paper reviews the development of the UK concept and diagnosis, describes the characteristics of 73 hyperkinetic syndrome children seen at the Bethlem and Maudsley Hospitals over 13 years and compares them to matched psychiatric controls diagnosed as conduct disordered. Results indicate that the two groups are differentiated by a number of symptomatic and clinical features, with the conduct disorder group showing a greater frequency of aggressive, antisocial, emotional and psychosocial disturbance which contrasts with higher frequencies of motor disturbance, inattentive and articulatory disturbance in the hyperkinetic group. No differences were found between the groups in brain pathology or sensory handicap. The findings provide support, at least in terms of symptoms and clinical features, for the concept and diagnosis of hyperkinetic syndrome (ICD 9). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While population-based breast screening for women over the age of 50 years is a generally accepted and proven health strategy, the role of breast screening specifically among women at high risk of familial breast cancer has remained controversial. Indeed, there are very few services specifically offering a breast-screening program for women at high risk of familial breast cancer., Methods: In 1999 a Familial Breast Cancer Screening Clinic (FBCSC) was established at the North Brisbane BreastScreen Queensland Service to provide a regular multimodality screening program utilizing clinical breast examination, breast ultrasound, and mammography for women at higher risk of hereditary breast cancer and with entry into the program commencing from the age of 30 years., Results: Since its inception, a total of 2440 women have participated in the FBCSC. A total 7051 breast-screening examinations have been performed on these participants, with 53 breast cancers being diagnosed, including 8 in situ ductal carcinomas, 38 invasive ductal carcinomas, and 7 invasive lobular carcinomas. The mean size of the cancers was 16 mm (range = 1-45 mm), and of the 45 invasive cancers, 60% were less than or equal to 15 mm in size. The overall axillary node positive rate was 24.5% (13/53). The invasive cancer detection rate for first-round screening was 8.3 cancers per 1000 women screened, with 5.2 cancers per 1000 women detected on subsequent round screening., Conclusions: The results from this service demonstrate that multimodality screening for women at high risk of familial breast cancer and including women of younger age is effective and appropriate, with very acceptable cancer detection rates and pathological cancer characteristics being observed consistent with early-stage detection. The colocated siting of this service within a BreastScreen Queensland facility has proven to be efficient and cost effective.

Hyperactive boys between 6 and 8 years of age, identified through systematic population-based screening of a community in London, were compared prospectively with a nonhyperactive control group to determine whether they were at greater risk of sustaining injuries. The study sample was drawn from 1296 completed parent and teacher questionnaires. Hyperactive groups were designated in three ways (parental report, teacher report, and combined parent and teacher report). Injuries were assessed by reviewing the medical records of the five emergency departments serving the community. Although boys with conduct problems did sustain more injuries than control subjects, no relationship between hyperactivity and injury was found. Similarly, when milder injuries were excluded from the analysis, the association remained negative. The absence of an association could not be accounted for by differential parental protectiveness of boys designated hyperactive. This study, which has a power of .80 to determine an increase in the relative risk of injury of 1.5, found no effect for hyperactive behavior in boys. Hyperactive behavior is probably not a risk factor for injury; if it is, it exerts a modest effect, less than 1.5, therefore accounting for less than 4% of injuries to school-aged boys.