User login
Discussing the ADHD ‘controversy’ with patients and parents
There are many topics within the child psychiatry community that are controversial. How many kids really deserve a diagnosis of bipolar disorder? Which type of therapy works best? Is cannabis a gateway drug? The existence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder as a legitimate psychiatric entity, however, is not one of them.
Despite this fact, there remains considerable controversy in the public about how “real” ADHD actually is. Social media, blogs, and even entire books have been written that disparage the diagnosis and even suggest that ADHD was fabricated by the pharmaceutical industry to sell medications. Although these publications and posts generally ignore the scientific literature or at least twist it beyond recognition, there are several aspects of ADHD that legitimately cause more confusion and less confidence about the diagnosis, relative to other common pediatric problems. This column attempts to describe and contextualize these elements so that pediatricians can be more fully informed when they are called to respond to some of the allegations against ADHD that often are brought up by families. 
Case summary
Hunter is a 6-year-old boy who presents with his mother and father for “behavioral concerns.” He always has been an energetic child, but the school has been having increasing difficulties with his behavior. Hunter struggles to stay in his seat and take part in quiet activities. His teacher needs to give multiple reminders per day about not interrupting others or speaking out in class. Without redirection, Hunter typically loses focus in class and does not complete his work. Because of these difficulties, the question of ADHD arose during a recent parent-teacher conference. While Hunter’s mother acknowledges these behaviors and notes similar ones at home, the father is resisting any further evaluation, claiming that Hunter “is just being a boy.” The father notes that he acted similarly as a child and “turned out okay.” When the mother tried to research ADHD online, she encountered several sites that claimed that the diagnosis of ADHD was “made up” by drug companies wanting “to turn kids into zombies.” At the appointment, the parents state that they want their son to succeed and be happy, but are concerned about some of the things they have read on the Internet.
Discussion
This example represents a common dilemma for parents who encounter so many mixed messages when doing background research on ADHD. Although the legitimacy of ADHD has been supported in literally hundreds of research studies that have examined areas such as genetics, neuropsychological testing, and brain imaging1,2, some of the lingering doubts about ADHD validity are rooted in characteristics of the diagnosis that do differ from some nonpsychiatric diagnoses. At the same time, however, further inspection reveals that these qualities exist for many other entities that have received far less public criticism. Three of these main qualities include the following:
1. ADHD is a dimensional rather than binary entity. Despite the fact that the current nomenclature continues to frame ADHD as an all-or-nothing diagnosis, there is now overwhelming scientific evidence that it is much more accurately conceptualized as a dimension3. As such, there is no clear-cut boundary between what should be judged as “typical” levels of attention and activity and ADHD. As written in a previous column4, in some ways the label of ADHD is a lot like the label of someone being tall, with some individuals clearly falling into the category of “tall” or “not tall,” while many others could be considered in-between. However, many of the most common nonpsychiatric conditions such as hypertension and hypercholesterolemia also exist this way without high levels of public controversy.
2. ADHD lacks a specific known neurobiologic marker that can be measured by a lab or neuroimaging test. As mentioned, there is a vast literature supporting the idea that the brains of people with ADHD are different from those without ADHD, but these differences tend to describe quantitative differences in regional brain volume, cortical thickness, activity levels, or connectivity rather than a discrete “thing” that a radiologist can point to on a scan. Given the dimensional nature of ADHD and the broad brain processes required for complex functions such as attention and motor activity, the lack of a specific and universal “lesion” underlying ADHD is to be expected, yet it still remains easy ammunition for those who criticize the diagnosis. Again, very similar cases can be made for other entities such as autism or low intelligence, which few argue are not real but also have no reliable biomarker to support them.
3. Medications often are used to treat ADHD. The diagnosis of ADHD would probably be far less controversial if one of its primary treatments did not involve psychiatric medications. While it is probably fair to say that the many nonpharmacologic approaches to ADHD are quite underutilized, it seems a stretch to use potential overreliance on medication as a legitimate reason to question the validity of a diagnosis. Opiate abuse also is a problem in this country, but that doesn’t mean a person’s pain doesn’t exist. As a practical tip, it can be reassuring for families to hear explicitly from their physician that “zombification” is not considered an acceptable medical outcome and that the prescribing clinician will promptly deal with any side effects that might occur with treatment5.
Understanding these aspects about ADHD and how they are misinterpreted in the media can help families make more informed and comfortable decisions about their child’s care in collaboration with their pediatrician. It also is important for pediatricians to be proactive in distributing reliable and science-backed material to the public in this new age of information overload.
Case follow-up
The pediatrician hears the family’s concerns and discusses the evidence supporting the scientific legitimacy of ADHD, as well as some of the qualities of the diagnosis that have led to its controversy. The parents are reassured but would like to proceed carefully and cautiously with further work-up and treatment. The pediatrician sends the family home with some quantitative rating scales to be completed by Hunter’s parents and teacher. She also makes a plan to begin monitoring several health promotion areas that could be impacting Hunter’s behavior including sleep quality, physical activity, screen time, and nutrition.
References
1. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010 Mar;33(1):159-80.
2. Dev Neuropsychol. 2013;38(4):211-25.3. Can Fam Physician. 2016 Dec;62(12):979-82.
4. ADHD boundaries with normal behavior. Pediatric News; published online Aug. 27, 2014.
5. Zombification is not an acceptable medical outcome. Psychology Today, ABCs of Child Psychiatry blog; published online Oct. 18, 2013.
Dr. Rettew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. Follow him on Twitter @PediPsych.
There are many topics within the child psychiatry community that are controversial. How many kids really deserve a diagnosis of bipolar disorder? Which type of therapy works best? Is cannabis a gateway drug? The existence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder as a legitimate psychiatric entity, however, is not one of them.
Despite this fact, there remains considerable controversy in the public about how “real” ADHD actually is. Social media, blogs, and even entire books have been written that disparage the diagnosis and even suggest that ADHD was fabricated by the pharmaceutical industry to sell medications. Although these publications and posts generally ignore the scientific literature or at least twist it beyond recognition, there are several aspects of ADHD that legitimately cause more confusion and less confidence about the diagnosis, relative to other common pediatric problems. This column attempts to describe and contextualize these elements so that pediatricians can be more fully informed when they are called to respond to some of the allegations against ADHD that often are brought up by families.
Case summary
Hunter is a 6-year-old boy who presents with his mother and father for “behavioral concerns.” He always has been an energetic child, but the school has been having increasing difficulties with his behavior. Hunter struggles to stay in his seat and take part in quiet activities. His teacher needs to give multiple reminders per day about not interrupting others or speaking out in class. Without redirection, Hunter typically loses focus in class and does not complete his work. Because of these difficulties, the question of ADHD arose during a recent parent-teacher conference. While Hunter’s mother acknowledges these behaviors and notes similar ones at home, the father is resisting any further evaluation, claiming that Hunter “is just being a boy.” The father notes that he acted similarly as a child and “turned out okay.” When the mother tried to research ADHD online, she encountered several sites that claimed that the diagnosis of ADHD was “made up” by drug companies wanting “to turn kids into zombies.” At the appointment, the parents state that they want their son to succeed and be happy, but are concerned about some of the things they have read on the Internet.
Discussion
This example represents a common dilemma for parents who encounter so many mixed messages when doing background research on ADHD. Although the legitimacy of ADHD has been supported in literally hundreds of research studies that have examined areas such as genetics, neuropsychological testing, and brain imaging1,2, some of the lingering doubts about ADHD validity are rooted in characteristics of the diagnosis that do differ from some nonpsychiatric diagnoses. At the same time, however, further inspection reveals that these qualities exist for many other entities that have received far less public criticism. Three of these main qualities include the following:
1. ADHD is a dimensional rather than binary entity. Despite the fact that the current nomenclature continues to frame ADHD as an all-or-nothing diagnosis, there is now overwhelming scientific evidence that it is much more accurately conceptualized as a dimension3. As such, there is no clear-cut boundary between what should be judged as “typical” levels of attention and activity and ADHD. As written in a previous column4, in some ways the label of ADHD is a lot like the label of someone being tall, with some individuals clearly falling into the category of “tall” or “not tall,” while many others could be considered in-between. However, many of the most common nonpsychiatric conditions such as hypertension and hypercholesterolemia also exist this way without high levels of public controversy.
2. ADHD lacks a specific known neurobiologic marker that can be measured by a lab or neuroimaging test. As mentioned, there is a vast literature supporting the idea that the brains of people with ADHD are different from those without ADHD, but these differences tend to describe quantitative differences in regional brain volume, cortical thickness, activity levels, or connectivity rather than a discrete “thing” that a radiologist can point to on a scan. Given the dimensional nature of ADHD and the broad brain processes required for complex functions such as attention and motor activity, the lack of a specific and universal “lesion” underlying ADHD is to be expected, yet it still remains easy ammunition for those who criticize the diagnosis. Again, very similar cases can be made for other entities such as autism or low intelligence, which few argue are not real but also have no reliable biomarker to support them.
3. Medications often are used to treat ADHD. The diagnosis of ADHD would probably be far less controversial if one of its primary treatments did not involve psychiatric medications. While it is probably fair to say that the many nonpharmacologic approaches to ADHD are quite underutilized, it seems a stretch to use potential overreliance on medication as a legitimate reason to question the validity of a diagnosis. Opiate abuse also is a problem in this country, but that doesn’t mean a person’s pain doesn’t exist. As a practical tip, it can be reassuring for families to hear explicitly from their physician that “zombification” is not considered an acceptable medical outcome and that the prescribing clinician will promptly deal with any side effects that might occur with treatment5.
Understanding these aspects about ADHD and how they are misinterpreted in the media can help families make more informed and comfortable decisions about their child’s care in collaboration with their pediatrician. It also is important for pediatricians to be proactive in distributing reliable and science-backed material to the public in this new age of information overload.
Case follow-up
The pediatrician hears the family’s concerns and discusses the evidence supporting the scientific legitimacy of ADHD, as well as some of the qualities of the diagnosis that have led to its controversy. The parents are reassured but would like to proceed carefully and cautiously with further work-up and treatment. The pediatrician sends the family home with some quantitative rating scales to be completed by Hunter’s parents and teacher. She also makes a plan to begin monitoring several health promotion areas that could be impacting Hunter’s behavior including sleep quality, physical activity, screen time, and nutrition.
References
1. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010 Mar;33(1):159-80.
2. Dev Neuropsychol. 2013;38(4):211-25.3. Can Fam Physician. 2016 Dec;62(12):979-82.
4. ADHD boundaries with normal behavior. Pediatric News; published online Aug. 27, 2014.
5. Zombification is not an acceptable medical outcome. Psychology Today, ABCs of Child Psychiatry blog; published online Oct. 18, 2013.
Dr. Rettew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. Follow him on Twitter @PediPsych.
There are many topics within the child psychiatry community that are controversial. How many kids really deserve a diagnosis of bipolar disorder? Which type of therapy works best? Is cannabis a gateway drug? The existence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder as a legitimate psychiatric entity, however, is not one of them.
Despite this fact, there remains considerable controversy in the public about how “real” ADHD actually is. Social media, blogs, and even entire books have been written that disparage the diagnosis and even suggest that ADHD was fabricated by the pharmaceutical industry to sell medications. Although these publications and posts generally ignore the scientific literature or at least twist it beyond recognition, there are several aspects of ADHD that legitimately cause more confusion and less confidence about the diagnosis, relative to other common pediatric problems. This column attempts to describe and contextualize these elements so that pediatricians can be more fully informed when they are called to respond to some of the allegations against ADHD that often are brought up by families.
Case summary
Hunter is a 6-year-old boy who presents with his mother and father for “behavioral concerns.” He always has been an energetic child, but the school has been having increasing difficulties with his behavior. Hunter struggles to stay in his seat and take part in quiet activities. His teacher needs to give multiple reminders per day about not interrupting others or speaking out in class. Without redirection, Hunter typically loses focus in class and does not complete his work. Because of these difficulties, the question of ADHD arose during a recent parent-teacher conference. While Hunter’s mother acknowledges these behaviors and notes similar ones at home, the father is resisting any further evaluation, claiming that Hunter “is just being a boy.” The father notes that he acted similarly as a child and “turned out okay.” When the mother tried to research ADHD online, she encountered several sites that claimed that the diagnosis of ADHD was “made up” by drug companies wanting “to turn kids into zombies.” At the appointment, the parents state that they want their son to succeed and be happy, but are concerned about some of the things they have read on the Internet.
Discussion
This example represents a common dilemma for parents who encounter so many mixed messages when doing background research on ADHD. Although the legitimacy of ADHD has been supported in literally hundreds of research studies that have examined areas such as genetics, neuropsychological testing, and brain imaging1,2, some of the lingering doubts about ADHD validity are rooted in characteristics of the diagnosis that do differ from some nonpsychiatric diagnoses. At the same time, however, further inspection reveals that these qualities exist for many other entities that have received far less public criticism. Three of these main qualities include the following:
1. ADHD is a dimensional rather than binary entity. Despite the fact that the current nomenclature continues to frame ADHD as an all-or-nothing diagnosis, there is now overwhelming scientific evidence that it is much more accurately conceptualized as a dimension3. As such, there is no clear-cut boundary between what should be judged as “typical” levels of attention and activity and ADHD. As written in a previous column4, in some ways the label of ADHD is a lot like the label of someone being tall, with some individuals clearly falling into the category of “tall” or “not tall,” while many others could be considered in-between. However, many of the most common nonpsychiatric conditions such as hypertension and hypercholesterolemia also exist this way without high levels of public controversy.
2. ADHD lacks a specific known neurobiologic marker that can be measured by a lab or neuroimaging test. As mentioned, there is a vast literature supporting the idea that the brains of people with ADHD are different from those without ADHD, but these differences tend to describe quantitative differences in regional brain volume, cortical thickness, activity levels, or connectivity rather than a discrete “thing” that a radiologist can point to on a scan. Given the dimensional nature of ADHD and the broad brain processes required for complex functions such as attention and motor activity, the lack of a specific and universal “lesion” underlying ADHD is to be expected, yet it still remains easy ammunition for those who criticize the diagnosis. Again, very similar cases can be made for other entities such as autism or low intelligence, which few argue are not real but also have no reliable biomarker to support them.
3. Medications often are used to treat ADHD. The diagnosis of ADHD would probably be far less controversial if one of its primary treatments did not involve psychiatric medications. While it is probably fair to say that the many nonpharmacologic approaches to ADHD are quite underutilized, it seems a stretch to use potential overreliance on medication as a legitimate reason to question the validity of a diagnosis. Opiate abuse also is a problem in this country, but that doesn’t mean a person’s pain doesn’t exist. As a practical tip, it can be reassuring for families to hear explicitly from their physician that “zombification” is not considered an acceptable medical outcome and that the prescribing clinician will promptly deal with any side effects that might occur with treatment5.
Understanding these aspects about ADHD and how they are misinterpreted in the media can help families make more informed and comfortable decisions about their child’s care in collaboration with their pediatrician. It also is important for pediatricians to be proactive in distributing reliable and science-backed material to the public in this new age of information overload.
Case follow-up
The pediatrician hears the family’s concerns and discusses the evidence supporting the scientific legitimacy of ADHD, as well as some of the qualities of the diagnosis that have led to its controversy. The parents are reassured but would like to proceed carefully and cautiously with further work-up and treatment. The pediatrician sends the family home with some quantitative rating scales to be completed by Hunter’s parents and teacher. She also makes a plan to begin monitoring several health promotion areas that could be impacting Hunter’s behavior including sleep quality, physical activity, screen time, and nutrition.
References
1. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010 Mar;33(1):159-80.
2. Dev Neuropsychol. 2013;38(4):211-25.3. Can Fam Physician. 2016 Dec;62(12):979-82.
4. ADHD boundaries with normal behavior. Pediatric News; published online Aug. 27, 2014.
5. Zombification is not an acceptable medical outcome. Psychology Today, ABCs of Child Psychiatry blog; published online Oct. 18, 2013.
Dr. Rettew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. Follow him on Twitter @PediPsych.
Intermittent energy restriction
My patients find it extremely difficult to determine the number of calories they consume on a daily basis. This activity can be laborious and time consuming, even when you have the right “app.”
So, when I tell my overweight and obese patients to restrict their caloric consumption to lose weight, the discussion usually begins with, “I know this might be difficult, but …” And it usually ends with me feeling a little less than anemic optimism.
But is it effective for weight loss?
C.S. Davis of Monash University, Melbourne, and colleagues conducted a systematic review of IER for weight loss (Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016 Mar;70[3]:292-9). The authors searched for articles evaluating the IER for weight loss among overweight and obese adults aged 18 years or older. IER was defined as periods of low energy intake (fast) alternating with periods of normal food intake (feed).
Eight studies were included in this review. Included studies defined low energy intake as 25%-50% of daily energy, or 400-1,400 kcal/day. The feed period was defined as either eating ad libitum or no less than 1,400 kcal/day. Studies varied in their approach and ranged from 2-4 consecutive fast days per week, followed by consecutive feed days, to three cycles of 5 weeks of fasting, followed by 5 weeks of ad lib eating.
IER was associated with 0.2-0.8 kg of weight loss per week. IER was associated with weight loss comparable to daily energy restriction (DER; that is, a typical diet). IER was comparable to typical daily energy restriction diets for fat mass, free-fat mass, and waist circumference.
The authors state that the amount of weight loss achieved with IER for a 100-kg individual would be associated with a 5% reduction in weight over a 5-week to 6-month time period. A 5% reduction is associated with a clinically significant reduction in health risk.
However, the authors found that fewer study participants planned to stick with IER beyond 6 months, compared with DER. Perhaps despite the difficulty that may exist in counting calories every day, the habit of doing the counting every day may be easier than doing it on an intermittent basis.
Regardless, IER is an option that may be beneficial to some patients. If other things haven’t worked for your patients, it is definitely worth a try.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
My patients find it extremely difficult to determine the number of calories they consume on a daily basis. This activity can be laborious and time consuming, even when you have the right “app.”
So, when I tell my overweight and obese patients to restrict their caloric consumption to lose weight, the discussion usually begins with, “I know this might be difficult, but …” And it usually ends with me feeling a little less than anemic optimism.
But is it effective for weight loss?
C.S. Davis of Monash University, Melbourne, and colleagues conducted a systematic review of IER for weight loss (Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016 Mar;70[3]:292-9). The authors searched for articles evaluating the IER for weight loss among overweight and obese adults aged 18 years or older. IER was defined as periods of low energy intake (fast) alternating with periods of normal food intake (feed).
Eight studies were included in this review. Included studies defined low energy intake as 25%-50% of daily energy, or 400-1,400 kcal/day. The feed period was defined as either eating ad libitum or no less than 1,400 kcal/day. Studies varied in their approach and ranged from 2-4 consecutive fast days per week, followed by consecutive feed days, to three cycles of 5 weeks of fasting, followed by 5 weeks of ad lib eating.
IER was associated with 0.2-0.8 kg of weight loss per week. IER was associated with weight loss comparable to daily energy restriction (DER; that is, a typical diet). IER was comparable to typical daily energy restriction diets for fat mass, free-fat mass, and waist circumference.
The authors state that the amount of weight loss achieved with IER for a 100-kg individual would be associated with a 5% reduction in weight over a 5-week to 6-month time period. A 5% reduction is associated with a clinically significant reduction in health risk.
However, the authors found that fewer study participants planned to stick with IER beyond 6 months, compared with DER. Perhaps despite the difficulty that may exist in counting calories every day, the habit of doing the counting every day may be easier than doing it on an intermittent basis.
Regardless, IER is an option that may be beneficial to some patients. If other things haven’t worked for your patients, it is definitely worth a try.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
My patients find it extremely difficult to determine the number of calories they consume on a daily basis. This activity can be laborious and time consuming, even when you have the right “app.”
So, when I tell my overweight and obese patients to restrict their caloric consumption to lose weight, the discussion usually begins with, “I know this might be difficult, but …” And it usually ends with me feeling a little less than anemic optimism.
But is it effective for weight loss?
C.S. Davis of Monash University, Melbourne, and colleagues conducted a systematic review of IER for weight loss (Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016 Mar;70[3]:292-9). The authors searched for articles evaluating the IER for weight loss among overweight and obese adults aged 18 years or older. IER was defined as periods of low energy intake (fast) alternating with periods of normal food intake (feed).
Eight studies were included in this review. Included studies defined low energy intake as 25%-50% of daily energy, or 400-1,400 kcal/day. The feed period was defined as either eating ad libitum or no less than 1,400 kcal/day. Studies varied in their approach and ranged from 2-4 consecutive fast days per week, followed by consecutive feed days, to three cycles of 5 weeks of fasting, followed by 5 weeks of ad lib eating.
IER was associated with 0.2-0.8 kg of weight loss per week. IER was associated with weight loss comparable to daily energy restriction (DER; that is, a typical diet). IER was comparable to typical daily energy restriction diets for fat mass, free-fat mass, and waist circumference.
The authors state that the amount of weight loss achieved with IER for a 100-kg individual would be associated with a 5% reduction in weight over a 5-week to 6-month time period. A 5% reduction is associated with a clinically significant reduction in health risk.
However, the authors found that fewer study participants planned to stick with IER beyond 6 months, compared with DER. Perhaps despite the difficulty that may exist in counting calories every day, the habit of doing the counting every day may be easier than doing it on an intermittent basis.
Regardless, IER is an option that may be beneficial to some patients. If other things haven’t worked for your patients, it is definitely worth a try.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
ADHD versus anxiety? An approach for pediatricians
This month’s column comes directly by request from a pediatric colleague. She asked about a common diagnostic dilemma for pediatricians that involves what at least on the surface appears like disruptive or oppositional behavior at the home, school, or both, but is complicated by the possibility that the primary engine of this behavior is anxiety. This is an important challenge to try and get right because the treatment plan will take different paths, depending on the final call that is made.
Case summary
Devin is a 6-year-old boy who comes in with his parents for concerns about his behavior. His parents note that he has always been “high strung” but not disruptive or aggressive. When he was younger, Devin was quite sensitive to sounds, textures, and tactile sensations, but this has improved on its own. Thunderstorms continue to bother him quite a bit, though, and he often will ask his parents repeated questions when it is cloudy about the possibility of a thunderstorm. With some extra teacher and parent support, Devin made the transition to kindergarten fairly well. Now, however, he is struggling in a larger 1st grade class. His teacher states that he often seems distracted, fidgety, and easily frustrated, causing him to “shut down” and refuse to do his work. This past week, during a more challenging assignment, he crawled under his desk and would not come out. The teacher is now recommending an evaluation for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Discussion
1. Are there other times in the child’s life when clearly he is very anxious? The presence of developmentally elevated levels of anxiety in areas outside the particular situations in question can provide a clue that anxiety is contributing to what otherwise might be seen as more oppositional behavior. In this case, the high levels of anxiety about thunderstorms show that anxiety is present in the child and could be playing a role in his disruptive behavior at school.
2. When he’s not focusing on the task at hand, what is he thinking about? Nonanxious children with or without ADHD can frequently daydream and go “off task,” but the content of those thoughts frequently involves anticipation for more preferred activities, reminisces of positive events from the past, or attention to other stimuli in the environment (for example, the bird in a tree outside). More anxious children, by contrast, may have more worried and ruminating thoughts about poor performance, possible bad events that might happen in the future, or “what if?” kinds of concerns.
3. Is there a family history of anxiety? While one should not over-rely on family history, the presence of one or more family members with clinically significant anxiety does raise the possibility of anxiety in the identified patient. Research indicates that the heritability of anxiety is about 50%,1,2 but that a significant amount of the transmission of anxiety from parent to child comes from environmental mechanisms.3
4. Is there a consistent trigger to his outbursts? For anxious children, meltdowns are frequently provoked by situations in which a child feels uncomfortable, overstimulated, or overwhelmed, and the outburst is a reflection of those intense feelings that are difficult to manage. An outburst like that above, which occurs when a child is pushed to finish difficult work, might be a good example of one that is triggered by anxiety.
5. What does the rating scale show? A broad-based rating scale that assesses multiple domains of symptoms can be a big help for diagnostic dilemmas such as this one. Our clinic uses the Child Behavior Checklist4 which has subscales for both anxiety and attention problems. Evidence of a spike in either of those domains, or both, really can help guide our thinking.
Of course, it is very possible that the answer to the ADHD versus anxiety question is that both are present. This is a common conclusion when it comes to mental health assessment, and it is different from the traditional “this or that” thinking present in more classic differential diagnosis decision making. Research indicates that the ADHD and anxiety disorders frequently co-occur.5 When that happens, concurrent evidence-based psychotherapy for anxiety in conjunction with multimodal treatment for ADHD has been recommended as a first step.6
Case follow-up
Based on all the information, the pediatrician judges that Devin’s disruptive behavior is in large part being driven by his level of anxiety. She makes a referral to a child psychologist to begin evidence-based psychotherapy and recommends that the school consider some modifications and accommodations that may help his behavior at school. At a follow-up appointment, Devin’s difficulties have improved, and there is little evidence of ADHD now that the anxiety has been fully addressed.
References
1. Genes Brain Behav. 2005;4(8):466-81.
2. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;49(3):248-55.
3. Am J Psychiatry. 2015;172(7):630-7.
4. Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles (Burlington, Vt.: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families, 2001).
5. J Anxiety Disord. 1997;11(4):377-94.
6. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2000;28(6):527-41.
Dr. Rettew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. Follow him on Twitter @PediPsych. Email him at [email protected].
This month’s column comes directly by request from a pediatric colleague. She asked about a common diagnostic dilemma for pediatricians that involves what at least on the surface appears like disruptive or oppositional behavior at the home, school, or both, but is complicated by the possibility that the primary engine of this behavior is anxiety. This is an important challenge to try and get right because the treatment plan will take different paths, depending on the final call that is made.
Case summary
Devin is a 6-year-old boy who comes in with his parents for concerns about his behavior. His parents note that he has always been “high strung” but not disruptive or aggressive. When he was younger, Devin was quite sensitive to sounds, textures, and tactile sensations, but this has improved on its own. Thunderstorms continue to bother him quite a bit, though, and he often will ask his parents repeated questions when it is cloudy about the possibility of a thunderstorm. With some extra teacher and parent support, Devin made the transition to kindergarten fairly well. Now, however, he is struggling in a larger 1st grade class. His teacher states that he often seems distracted, fidgety, and easily frustrated, causing him to “shut down” and refuse to do his work. This past week, during a more challenging assignment, he crawled under his desk and would not come out. The teacher is now recommending an evaluation for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Discussion
1. Are there other times in the child’s life when clearly he is very anxious? The presence of developmentally elevated levels of anxiety in areas outside the particular situations in question can provide a clue that anxiety is contributing to what otherwise might be seen as more oppositional behavior. In this case, the high levels of anxiety about thunderstorms show that anxiety is present in the child and could be playing a role in his disruptive behavior at school.
2. When he’s not focusing on the task at hand, what is he thinking about? Nonanxious children with or without ADHD can frequently daydream and go “off task,” but the content of those thoughts frequently involves anticipation for more preferred activities, reminisces of positive events from the past, or attention to other stimuli in the environment (for example, the bird in a tree outside). More anxious children, by contrast, may have more worried and ruminating thoughts about poor performance, possible bad events that might happen in the future, or “what if?” kinds of concerns.
3. Is there a family history of anxiety? While one should not over-rely on family history, the presence of one or more family members with clinically significant anxiety does raise the possibility of anxiety in the identified patient. Research indicates that the heritability of anxiety is about 50%,1,2 but that a significant amount of the transmission of anxiety from parent to child comes from environmental mechanisms.3
4. Is there a consistent trigger to his outbursts? For anxious children, meltdowns are frequently provoked by situations in which a child feels uncomfortable, overstimulated, or overwhelmed, and the outburst is a reflection of those intense feelings that are difficult to manage. An outburst like that above, which occurs when a child is pushed to finish difficult work, might be a good example of one that is triggered by anxiety.
5. What does the rating scale show? A broad-based rating scale that assesses multiple domains of symptoms can be a big help for diagnostic dilemmas such as this one. Our clinic uses the Child Behavior Checklist4 which has subscales for both anxiety and attention problems. Evidence of a spike in either of those domains, or both, really can help guide our thinking.
Of course, it is very possible that the answer to the ADHD versus anxiety question is that both are present. This is a common conclusion when it comes to mental health assessment, and it is different from the traditional “this or that” thinking present in more classic differential diagnosis decision making. Research indicates that the ADHD and anxiety disorders frequently co-occur.5 When that happens, concurrent evidence-based psychotherapy for anxiety in conjunction with multimodal treatment for ADHD has been recommended as a first step.6
Case follow-up
Based on all the information, the pediatrician judges that Devin’s disruptive behavior is in large part being driven by his level of anxiety. She makes a referral to a child psychologist to begin evidence-based psychotherapy and recommends that the school consider some modifications and accommodations that may help his behavior at school. At a follow-up appointment, Devin’s difficulties have improved, and there is little evidence of ADHD now that the anxiety has been fully addressed.
References
1. Genes Brain Behav. 2005;4(8):466-81.
2. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;49(3):248-55.
3. Am J Psychiatry. 2015;172(7):630-7.
4. Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles (Burlington, Vt.: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families, 2001).
5. J Anxiety Disord. 1997;11(4):377-94.
6. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2000;28(6):527-41.
Dr. Rettew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. Follow him on Twitter @PediPsych. Email him at [email protected].
This month’s column comes directly by request from a pediatric colleague. She asked about a common diagnostic dilemma for pediatricians that involves what at least on the surface appears like disruptive or oppositional behavior at the home, school, or both, but is complicated by the possibility that the primary engine of this behavior is anxiety. This is an important challenge to try and get right because the treatment plan will take different paths, depending on the final call that is made.
Case summary
Devin is a 6-year-old boy who comes in with his parents for concerns about his behavior. His parents note that he has always been “high strung” but not disruptive or aggressive. When he was younger, Devin was quite sensitive to sounds, textures, and tactile sensations, but this has improved on its own. Thunderstorms continue to bother him quite a bit, though, and he often will ask his parents repeated questions when it is cloudy about the possibility of a thunderstorm. With some extra teacher and parent support, Devin made the transition to kindergarten fairly well. Now, however, he is struggling in a larger 1st grade class. His teacher states that he often seems distracted, fidgety, and easily frustrated, causing him to “shut down” and refuse to do his work. This past week, during a more challenging assignment, he crawled under his desk and would not come out. The teacher is now recommending an evaluation for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Discussion
1. Are there other times in the child’s life when clearly he is very anxious? The presence of developmentally elevated levels of anxiety in areas outside the particular situations in question can provide a clue that anxiety is contributing to what otherwise might be seen as more oppositional behavior. In this case, the high levels of anxiety about thunderstorms show that anxiety is present in the child and could be playing a role in his disruptive behavior at school.
2. When he’s not focusing on the task at hand, what is he thinking about? Nonanxious children with or without ADHD can frequently daydream and go “off task,” but the content of those thoughts frequently involves anticipation for more preferred activities, reminisces of positive events from the past, or attention to other stimuli in the environment (for example, the bird in a tree outside). More anxious children, by contrast, may have more worried and ruminating thoughts about poor performance, possible bad events that might happen in the future, or “what if?” kinds of concerns.
3. Is there a family history of anxiety? While one should not over-rely on family history, the presence of one or more family members with clinically significant anxiety does raise the possibility of anxiety in the identified patient. Research indicates that the heritability of anxiety is about 50%,1,2 but that a significant amount of the transmission of anxiety from parent to child comes from environmental mechanisms.3
4. Is there a consistent trigger to his outbursts? For anxious children, meltdowns are frequently provoked by situations in which a child feels uncomfortable, overstimulated, or overwhelmed, and the outburst is a reflection of those intense feelings that are difficult to manage. An outburst like that above, which occurs when a child is pushed to finish difficult work, might be a good example of one that is triggered by anxiety.
5. What does the rating scale show? A broad-based rating scale that assesses multiple domains of symptoms can be a big help for diagnostic dilemmas such as this one. Our clinic uses the Child Behavior Checklist4 which has subscales for both anxiety and attention problems. Evidence of a spike in either of those domains, or both, really can help guide our thinking.
Of course, it is very possible that the answer to the ADHD versus anxiety question is that both are present. This is a common conclusion when it comes to mental health assessment, and it is different from the traditional “this or that” thinking present in more classic differential diagnosis decision making. Research indicates that the ADHD and anxiety disorders frequently co-occur.5 When that happens, concurrent evidence-based psychotherapy for anxiety in conjunction with multimodal treatment for ADHD has been recommended as a first step.6
Case follow-up
Based on all the information, the pediatrician judges that Devin’s disruptive behavior is in large part being driven by his level of anxiety. She makes a referral to a child psychologist to begin evidence-based psychotherapy and recommends that the school consider some modifications and accommodations that may help his behavior at school. At a follow-up appointment, Devin’s difficulties have improved, and there is little evidence of ADHD now that the anxiety has been fully addressed.
References
1. Genes Brain Behav. 2005;4(8):466-81.
2. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;49(3):248-55.
3. Am J Psychiatry. 2015;172(7):630-7.
4. Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles (Burlington, Vt.: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families, 2001).
5. J Anxiety Disord. 1997;11(4):377-94.
6. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2000;28(6):527-41.
Dr. Rettew is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. Follow him on Twitter @PediPsych. Email him at [email protected].
Preventing weight gain after smoking cessation
About three-quarters of current cigarette smokers want to quit, 40% will attempt to quit annually, and 90% of self-initiated attempts will be unsuccessful. Mean weight gain after smoking cessation may be as much as 13 pounds at 1 year, and 21 pounds over 5 years.
Population data suggest that more than one-half of women and one-third of men with a previous attempt to quit smoking report that weight gain was one of the primary reasons for relapse back to smoking.
Lorcaserin is a 5-HT2c (serotonin) receptor agonist FDA-approved for weight loss. Varenicline is the most effective monotherapy for smoking cessation and targets the alpha-4 beta-2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.
Ryan Hurt, MD, and his colleagues recently completed a pilot clinical trial evaluating the potential efficacy of combining varenicline and lorcaserin for the prevention of PCWG in obese and overweight smokers (Nicotine Tob Res. 2016 Nov 16. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntw304).
In this study, 20 smokers with a body mass index of 27-40 kg/m2 received varenicline and lorcaserin for 12 weeks.
Fifty percent of subjects were abstinent from smoking at 12 weeks, among whom weight gain was only +1.1 ± 3.9 kg (90% confidence interval, –0.9 to +3.1). The most-common side effect of the combination was sleep disturbance, reported by five patients.
The study was limited by the small sample size and the absence of a control group or placebo.
As clinicians, we frequently employ combination therapy in chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension when single-agent therapy is ineffective. By combining drugs with different therapeutic targets, we can achieve our treatment goals.
In tobacco dependence treatment, we use combination pharmacotherapy for heavier smokers or for those who have tried and failed to quit previously. Interestingly, lorcaserin has been demonstrated in another pilot study to increase smoking cessation rates by itself.
The combination of lorcaserin and varenicline holds promise for the treatment of tobacco dependence by attacking tobacco dependence through two different mechanisms and preventing PCWG, which may prevent relapse back to smoking.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
About three-quarters of current cigarette smokers want to quit, 40% will attempt to quit annually, and 90% of self-initiated attempts will be unsuccessful. Mean weight gain after smoking cessation may be as much as 13 pounds at 1 year, and 21 pounds over 5 years.
Population data suggest that more than one-half of women and one-third of men with a previous attempt to quit smoking report that weight gain was one of the primary reasons for relapse back to smoking.
Lorcaserin is a 5-HT2c (serotonin) receptor agonist FDA-approved for weight loss. Varenicline is the most effective monotherapy for smoking cessation and targets the alpha-4 beta-2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.
Ryan Hurt, MD, and his colleagues recently completed a pilot clinical trial evaluating the potential efficacy of combining varenicline and lorcaserin for the prevention of PCWG in obese and overweight smokers (Nicotine Tob Res. 2016 Nov 16. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntw304).
In this study, 20 smokers with a body mass index of 27-40 kg/m2 received varenicline and lorcaserin for 12 weeks.
Fifty percent of subjects were abstinent from smoking at 12 weeks, among whom weight gain was only +1.1 ± 3.9 kg (90% confidence interval, –0.9 to +3.1). The most-common side effect of the combination was sleep disturbance, reported by five patients.
The study was limited by the small sample size and the absence of a control group or placebo.
As clinicians, we frequently employ combination therapy in chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension when single-agent therapy is ineffective. By combining drugs with different therapeutic targets, we can achieve our treatment goals.
In tobacco dependence treatment, we use combination pharmacotherapy for heavier smokers or for those who have tried and failed to quit previously. Interestingly, lorcaserin has been demonstrated in another pilot study to increase smoking cessation rates by itself.
The combination of lorcaserin and varenicline holds promise for the treatment of tobacco dependence by attacking tobacco dependence through two different mechanisms and preventing PCWG, which may prevent relapse back to smoking.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
About three-quarters of current cigarette smokers want to quit, 40% will attempt to quit annually, and 90% of self-initiated attempts will be unsuccessful. Mean weight gain after smoking cessation may be as much as 13 pounds at 1 year, and 21 pounds over 5 years.
Population data suggest that more than one-half of women and one-third of men with a previous attempt to quit smoking report that weight gain was one of the primary reasons for relapse back to smoking.
Lorcaserin is a 5-HT2c (serotonin) receptor agonist FDA-approved for weight loss. Varenicline is the most effective monotherapy for smoking cessation and targets the alpha-4 beta-2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.
Ryan Hurt, MD, and his colleagues recently completed a pilot clinical trial evaluating the potential efficacy of combining varenicline and lorcaserin for the prevention of PCWG in obese and overweight smokers (Nicotine Tob Res. 2016 Nov 16. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntw304).
In this study, 20 smokers with a body mass index of 27-40 kg/m2 received varenicline and lorcaserin for 12 weeks.
Fifty percent of subjects were abstinent from smoking at 12 weeks, among whom weight gain was only +1.1 ± 3.9 kg (90% confidence interval, –0.9 to +3.1). The most-common side effect of the combination was sleep disturbance, reported by five patients.
The study was limited by the small sample size and the absence of a control group or placebo.
As clinicians, we frequently employ combination therapy in chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension when single-agent therapy is ineffective. By combining drugs with different therapeutic targets, we can achieve our treatment goals.
In tobacco dependence treatment, we use combination pharmacotherapy for heavier smokers or for those who have tried and failed to quit previously. Interestingly, lorcaserin has been demonstrated in another pilot study to increase smoking cessation rates by itself.
The combination of lorcaserin and varenicline holds promise for the treatment of tobacco dependence by attacking tobacco dependence through two different mechanisms and preventing PCWG, which may prevent relapse back to smoking.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
Postelection anxiety
Introduction
Since the election, many of the psychiatrists and psychologists in our office have reported a wave of anxiety among our patients. These fears have sometimes come from watching television commercials that highlight the faults of the other party or from watching the debates themselves. Children have reported fears of a nuclear war, of being taken away from family, or of being harmed or killed because of racial, religious, immigration, disability, gender, or sexual orientation status. In addition, some children are reporting remarks by peers.
Case summary
Discussion
How can we support our patients and their parents in responding to this surge in anxiety? First, we can reiterate the central importance of family. What the family models in values, behavior, and coping is central to how children respond to stress and winning and losing. Parents who manage their own emotions model how to cope with both victory and defeat, demonstrating appropriate celebration as well as grief and anger. Coping strategies for parents can include reaching out to supports from family and friends, using relaxation strategies, and then planning practical next steps to take.
Parents should reassure their children that they are there to keep their children safe. Modeling self-care and keeping the family routine as stable as possible is a powerful source of this sense of safety. As always, parents should think about what their children are consuming in the way of electronics.
In talking to children, listening is a first step. Help children find the words for what they are feeling. Consider your own words and the rhetoric of the election. Withering scorn of the other side has become increasingly common and not only damages our ability to understand other points of view and resolve conflicts but is also leading to intense anxiety in our children. The extreme nature of some of these words has led some children to believe that complete disaster is imminent should the other side win. Try to avoid using words that intensify fear. Acknowledge the feelings that children have, but provide reassurance of safety and hope.
Using the principles of cognitive-behavioral therapy, a therapist or parent can help a child think through how their thoughts are connected with feelings and behavior. When we are fearful, we often think that the absolute worst is going to happen, or we imagine that we definitely know the future. Sometimes an extreme thought can magnify feelings to the point that constructive behavior is blocked. A therapist might acknowledge feelings, but also help enlarge the child’s perspective. There are many reasons why people voted for or against candidates, and we don’t know everything about them just because of how they chose to vote. Discussing the three branches of government and the system of checks and balances that bring many people together to think over a problem can help a child see that the government is more than just one person. Parents or therapists can talk about protections in the Constitution such as freedom of the press, which allows us to be informed of what is going on. Parents might want to talk about the reality that we are one country, and that the vast majority of people on both sides share many, if not all, values.
Helping a child consider other perspectives isn’t saying that there are no reasons at all for anxiety, but that there are many possibilities for the future, and that a family can think together about what behaviors they want to engage in. There may be specific actions a child or family might want to take to have a voice in how the country moves forward.
Treatment plan for Jane
• Psychotherapy. Continue cognitive-behavioral therapy with a focus on identifying thoughts tied to anxiety that are overgeneralizations or exaggerations. Discuss alternative thoughts with greater perspective.
• Parents. Discuss supporting the child through listening, reassurance of safety, reestablishment of family routine, and family discussion about what actions to take to promote values.
• Health promotion. Discuss using exercise, pleasant activities, mindfulness, and minimizing of screen time as ways to cope with stress.
• Medications. There is no need to use medications for the child’s acute stress response.
Resources
1. Psychological First Aid: Field Operations Manual , 2nd ed. (National Child Traumatic Stress Network, National Center for PTSD, 2006).
2. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxious Children: Therapist Manual, 3rd edition. (Ardmore, Pa.: Workbook Publishing, 2006).
Dr. Hall is assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
Introduction
Since the election, many of the psychiatrists and psychologists in our office have reported a wave of anxiety among our patients. These fears have sometimes come from watching television commercials that highlight the faults of the other party or from watching the debates themselves. Children have reported fears of a nuclear war, of being taken away from family, or of being harmed or killed because of racial, religious, immigration, disability, gender, or sexual orientation status. In addition, some children are reporting remarks by peers.
Case summary
Discussion
How can we support our patients and their parents in responding to this surge in anxiety? First, we can reiterate the central importance of family. What the family models in values, behavior, and coping is central to how children respond to stress and winning and losing. Parents who manage their own emotions model how to cope with both victory and defeat, demonstrating appropriate celebration as well as grief and anger. Coping strategies for parents can include reaching out to supports from family and friends, using relaxation strategies, and then planning practical next steps to take.
Parents should reassure their children that they are there to keep their children safe. Modeling self-care and keeping the family routine as stable as possible is a powerful source of this sense of safety. As always, parents should think about what their children are consuming in the way of electronics.
In talking to children, listening is a first step. Help children find the words for what they are feeling. Consider your own words and the rhetoric of the election. Withering scorn of the other side has become increasingly common and not only damages our ability to understand other points of view and resolve conflicts but is also leading to intense anxiety in our children. The extreme nature of some of these words has led some children to believe that complete disaster is imminent should the other side win. Try to avoid using words that intensify fear. Acknowledge the feelings that children have, but provide reassurance of safety and hope.
Using the principles of cognitive-behavioral therapy, a therapist or parent can help a child think through how their thoughts are connected with feelings and behavior. When we are fearful, we often think that the absolute worst is going to happen, or we imagine that we definitely know the future. Sometimes an extreme thought can magnify feelings to the point that constructive behavior is blocked. A therapist might acknowledge feelings, but also help enlarge the child’s perspective. There are many reasons why people voted for or against candidates, and we don’t know everything about them just because of how they chose to vote. Discussing the three branches of government and the system of checks and balances that bring many people together to think over a problem can help a child see that the government is more than just one person. Parents or therapists can talk about protections in the Constitution such as freedom of the press, which allows us to be informed of what is going on. Parents might want to talk about the reality that we are one country, and that the vast majority of people on both sides share many, if not all, values.
Helping a child consider other perspectives isn’t saying that there are no reasons at all for anxiety, but that there are many possibilities for the future, and that a family can think together about what behaviors they want to engage in. There may be specific actions a child or family might want to take to have a voice in how the country moves forward.
Treatment plan for Jane
• Psychotherapy. Continue cognitive-behavioral therapy with a focus on identifying thoughts tied to anxiety that are overgeneralizations or exaggerations. Discuss alternative thoughts with greater perspective.
• Parents. Discuss supporting the child through listening, reassurance of safety, reestablishment of family routine, and family discussion about what actions to take to promote values.
• Health promotion. Discuss using exercise, pleasant activities, mindfulness, and minimizing of screen time as ways to cope with stress.
• Medications. There is no need to use medications for the child’s acute stress response.
Resources
1. Psychological First Aid: Field Operations Manual , 2nd ed. (National Child Traumatic Stress Network, National Center for PTSD, 2006).
2. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxious Children: Therapist Manual, 3rd edition. (Ardmore, Pa.: Workbook Publishing, 2006).
Dr. Hall is assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
Introduction
Since the election, many of the psychiatrists and psychologists in our office have reported a wave of anxiety among our patients. These fears have sometimes come from watching television commercials that highlight the faults of the other party or from watching the debates themselves. Children have reported fears of a nuclear war, of being taken away from family, or of being harmed or killed because of racial, religious, immigration, disability, gender, or sexual orientation status. In addition, some children are reporting remarks by peers.
Case summary
Discussion
How can we support our patients and their parents in responding to this surge in anxiety? First, we can reiterate the central importance of family. What the family models in values, behavior, and coping is central to how children respond to stress and winning and losing. Parents who manage their own emotions model how to cope with both victory and defeat, demonstrating appropriate celebration as well as grief and anger. Coping strategies for parents can include reaching out to supports from family and friends, using relaxation strategies, and then planning practical next steps to take.
Parents should reassure their children that they are there to keep their children safe. Modeling self-care and keeping the family routine as stable as possible is a powerful source of this sense of safety. As always, parents should think about what their children are consuming in the way of electronics.
In talking to children, listening is a first step. Help children find the words for what they are feeling. Consider your own words and the rhetoric of the election. Withering scorn of the other side has become increasingly common and not only damages our ability to understand other points of view and resolve conflicts but is also leading to intense anxiety in our children. The extreme nature of some of these words has led some children to believe that complete disaster is imminent should the other side win. Try to avoid using words that intensify fear. Acknowledge the feelings that children have, but provide reassurance of safety and hope.
Using the principles of cognitive-behavioral therapy, a therapist or parent can help a child think through how their thoughts are connected with feelings and behavior. When we are fearful, we often think that the absolute worst is going to happen, or we imagine that we definitely know the future. Sometimes an extreme thought can magnify feelings to the point that constructive behavior is blocked. A therapist might acknowledge feelings, but also help enlarge the child’s perspective. There are many reasons why people voted for or against candidates, and we don’t know everything about them just because of how they chose to vote. Discussing the three branches of government and the system of checks and balances that bring many people together to think over a problem can help a child see that the government is more than just one person. Parents or therapists can talk about protections in the Constitution such as freedom of the press, which allows us to be informed of what is going on. Parents might want to talk about the reality that we are one country, and that the vast majority of people on both sides share many, if not all, values.
Helping a child consider other perspectives isn’t saying that there are no reasons at all for anxiety, but that there are many possibilities for the future, and that a family can think together about what behaviors they want to engage in. There may be specific actions a child or family might want to take to have a voice in how the country moves forward.
Treatment plan for Jane
• Psychotherapy. Continue cognitive-behavioral therapy with a focus on identifying thoughts tied to anxiety that are overgeneralizations or exaggerations. Discuss alternative thoughts with greater perspective.
• Parents. Discuss supporting the child through listening, reassurance of safety, reestablishment of family routine, and family discussion about what actions to take to promote values.
• Health promotion. Discuss using exercise, pleasant activities, mindfulness, and minimizing of screen time as ways to cope with stress.
• Medications. There is no need to use medications for the child’s acute stress response.
Resources
1. Psychological First Aid: Field Operations Manual , 2nd ed. (National Child Traumatic Stress Network, National Center for PTSD, 2006).
2. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxious Children: Therapist Manual, 3rd edition. (Ardmore, Pa.: Workbook Publishing, 2006).
Dr. Hall is assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
Sensory-related difficulties in children
A Google search of “sensory issues in children” reveals more than 20 million results and a wide range of terminology that can be confusing to parents, providers, and youth themselves. Phenomena such as sensory processing disorder, sensory integration disorder, sensory discrimination disorder, and sensory defensiveness are noted, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a label not uncommonly attached to the former terms.
The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) does not include a discrete diagnosis to apply to children who have sensory differences, (meaning that they have difficulties regulating sensory input and such difficulties affect their ability to successfully relate to the world around them), but these differences are now part of the diagnostic criteria for ASD. The literature indicates that a majority of youth with ASD demonstrate features of sensory overresponsiveness (JAMA Psychiatry. 2015 Aug;72[8]:778-86), and providers should rightfully be concerned about the possibility of autism in a youngster who is presenting with severe negative responses to auditory, visual, and/or tactile stimuli.
Notably, however, even though sensory problems are considered a feature of autism, they are not pathognomonic for the disorder, and most children with these problems are, in fact, not autistic. Children with deficits in their ability to modulate sensory stimuli can present with a wide range of emotional-behavioral problems, including externalizing behaviors and internalizing symptoms manifesting with anxiety, attention challenges, mood dysregulation, and overall poor adaptive functioning. The relationship between sensory issues (both underresponsiveness and overresponsiveness) and psychopathology is rather complicated as sensory dysfunction can exist independent of a psychiatric disorder, be a significant risk factor for the development of the disorder (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009 Nov;37[8]:1077-87), and have symptom overlap with the disorder.
All in all, in spite of this complexity, since the 1960’s (Am J Occup Ther. 1964 Jan-Feb;18:6-11), it’s been clear that sensory dysfunction in children is associated with impairments in development, learning, and self-regulation. Parents of these children experience elevated levels of stress (J Child Fam Stud. 2013 Oct 1;22[7]:912-21), and early identification of sensory differences, psychoeducation, and referral for treatment are critical to minimize these impacts and foster positive outcomes.
Case Summary
In gathering a history and administering the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS), it became clear that Sarah did not present with the social-communicative impairments that characterize ASD, but she did demonstrate repetitive hand flapping, troubles tolerating large social get-togethers, hypersensitivities, and a vulnerability to getting stuck when attempting to transition between activities. It is not uncommon for Sarah to use “fight-and-flight” reactions when faced with internal or external discomfort. Child Behavior Checklist data revealed multi-informant endorsement of clinical range symptoms across broad-band and narrow-band domains. Additionally, the Sensory Profile–2 yielded elevated scores in categories measuring sensory seeking and sensory sensitivity. The Sensory Profile is a standardized tool that uses caregiver and teacher-completed questionnaires to examine a child’s sensory processing abilities and provide data regarding the effect of such sensory processing on functional performance. Integrating all the available data, our team certainly appreciated Sarah’s profound sensory overresponsiveness, and a diagnosis of an unspecified anxiety disorder was provided along with consideration for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (with teacher input needed to further investigate this possibility). The family history revealed anxiety disorders occurring both maternally and paternally. Additionally, Sarah’s mother’s acknowledged having her own similar sensory issues as a child.
Discussion
Associations among anxiety, sensory overresponsiveness, and ADHD are recognized in the literature (Am J Occup Ther. 2009 Jul-Aug;63[4]:433-40) and have implications for treatment. Furthermore, there is evidence that there is a heritable aspect to sensory processing abnormalities, and tactile defensiveness is associated with fearful temperament and anxiety (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2006 Jun;34[3]:393-407). In Sarah’s case, her intense behavioral response to ordinary sensory stimuli was striking, and she had not yet been referred for an occupational therapy evaluation, which was the primary recommendation to further assess and understand her complicated sensory profile. As one component of a comprehensive treatment plan, an occupational therapist (www.aota.org), by using evidence-based practices in a sensory-integration framework, could be helpful in addressing Sarah’s range of challenges and promoting positive outcomes related to socialization, behavioral regulation, and attention. Occupational therapists, with assistance from other team members, also could work with Sarah and her family on developing relaxation skills and use exposure and response prevention–oriented intervention strategies to address anxieties. Families, however, should be counseled about the limited data on the use of sensory-based therapies (Pediatrics. 2012 Jun;129[6]:1186-9); the use of parent-management training/family coaching should also be a treatment consideration to help promote overall regulatory functioning in the household.
Clinical pearl
When encountering youth with sensory-related challenges, a clinician’s diagnostic considerations should be more than just thinking about the possibility of an autism spectrum disorder. Symptoms of sensory overresponsiveness are associated with other emotional-behavioral conditions, but also can be seen without co-occurring psychopathology. With the latter, however, providers should be mindful that family-related impairments still may be quite noteworthy (J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;50[12]:1210-9) and associated behavior problems could be attributed incorrectly to other diagnoses (which may lead to the recommendation of ineffective and inappropriate treatments). Much more research is needed to help develop a robust framework for diagnosing and labeling sensory issues in children and studying the efficacy of available intervention strategies.
Dr. Dickerson, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, is assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, Burlington, where he is director of the autism diagnostic clinic.
A Google search of “sensory issues in children” reveals more than 20 million results and a wide range of terminology that can be confusing to parents, providers, and youth themselves. Phenomena such as sensory processing disorder, sensory integration disorder, sensory discrimination disorder, and sensory defensiveness are noted, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a label not uncommonly attached to the former terms.
The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) does not include a discrete diagnosis to apply to children who have sensory differences, (meaning that they have difficulties regulating sensory input and such difficulties affect their ability to successfully relate to the world around them), but these differences are now part of the diagnostic criteria for ASD. The literature indicates that a majority of youth with ASD demonstrate features of sensory overresponsiveness (JAMA Psychiatry. 2015 Aug;72[8]:778-86), and providers should rightfully be concerned about the possibility of autism in a youngster who is presenting with severe negative responses to auditory, visual, and/or tactile stimuli.
Notably, however, even though sensory problems are considered a feature of autism, they are not pathognomonic for the disorder, and most children with these problems are, in fact, not autistic. Children with deficits in their ability to modulate sensory stimuli can present with a wide range of emotional-behavioral problems, including externalizing behaviors and internalizing symptoms manifesting with anxiety, attention challenges, mood dysregulation, and overall poor adaptive functioning. The relationship between sensory issues (both underresponsiveness and overresponsiveness) and psychopathology is rather complicated as sensory dysfunction can exist independent of a psychiatric disorder, be a significant risk factor for the development of the disorder (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009 Nov;37[8]:1077-87), and have symptom overlap with the disorder.
All in all, in spite of this complexity, since the 1960’s (Am J Occup Ther. 1964 Jan-Feb;18:6-11), it’s been clear that sensory dysfunction in children is associated with impairments in development, learning, and self-regulation. Parents of these children experience elevated levels of stress (J Child Fam Stud. 2013 Oct 1;22[7]:912-21), and early identification of sensory differences, psychoeducation, and referral for treatment are critical to minimize these impacts and foster positive outcomes.
Case Summary
In gathering a history and administering the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS), it became clear that Sarah did not present with the social-communicative impairments that characterize ASD, but she did demonstrate repetitive hand flapping, troubles tolerating large social get-togethers, hypersensitivities, and a vulnerability to getting stuck when attempting to transition between activities. It is not uncommon for Sarah to use “fight-and-flight” reactions when faced with internal or external discomfort. Child Behavior Checklist data revealed multi-informant endorsement of clinical range symptoms across broad-band and narrow-band domains. Additionally, the Sensory Profile–2 yielded elevated scores in categories measuring sensory seeking and sensory sensitivity. The Sensory Profile is a standardized tool that uses caregiver and teacher-completed questionnaires to examine a child’s sensory processing abilities and provide data regarding the effect of such sensory processing on functional performance. Integrating all the available data, our team certainly appreciated Sarah’s profound sensory overresponsiveness, and a diagnosis of an unspecified anxiety disorder was provided along with consideration for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (with teacher input needed to further investigate this possibility). The family history revealed anxiety disorders occurring both maternally and paternally. Additionally, Sarah’s mother’s acknowledged having her own similar sensory issues as a child.
Discussion
Associations among anxiety, sensory overresponsiveness, and ADHD are recognized in the literature (Am J Occup Ther. 2009 Jul-Aug;63[4]:433-40) and have implications for treatment. Furthermore, there is evidence that there is a heritable aspect to sensory processing abnormalities, and tactile defensiveness is associated with fearful temperament and anxiety (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2006 Jun;34[3]:393-407). In Sarah’s case, her intense behavioral response to ordinary sensory stimuli was striking, and she had not yet been referred for an occupational therapy evaluation, which was the primary recommendation to further assess and understand her complicated sensory profile. As one component of a comprehensive treatment plan, an occupational therapist (www.aota.org), by using evidence-based practices in a sensory-integration framework, could be helpful in addressing Sarah’s range of challenges and promoting positive outcomes related to socialization, behavioral regulation, and attention. Occupational therapists, with assistance from other team members, also could work with Sarah and her family on developing relaxation skills and use exposure and response prevention–oriented intervention strategies to address anxieties. Families, however, should be counseled about the limited data on the use of sensory-based therapies (Pediatrics. 2012 Jun;129[6]:1186-9); the use of parent-management training/family coaching should also be a treatment consideration to help promote overall regulatory functioning in the household.
Clinical pearl
When encountering youth with sensory-related challenges, a clinician’s diagnostic considerations should be more than just thinking about the possibility of an autism spectrum disorder. Symptoms of sensory overresponsiveness are associated with other emotional-behavioral conditions, but also can be seen without co-occurring psychopathology. With the latter, however, providers should be mindful that family-related impairments still may be quite noteworthy (J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;50[12]:1210-9) and associated behavior problems could be attributed incorrectly to other diagnoses (which may lead to the recommendation of ineffective and inappropriate treatments). Much more research is needed to help develop a robust framework for diagnosing and labeling sensory issues in children and studying the efficacy of available intervention strategies.
Dr. Dickerson, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, is assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, Burlington, where he is director of the autism diagnostic clinic.
A Google search of “sensory issues in children” reveals more than 20 million results and a wide range of terminology that can be confusing to parents, providers, and youth themselves. Phenomena such as sensory processing disorder, sensory integration disorder, sensory discrimination disorder, and sensory defensiveness are noted, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a label not uncommonly attached to the former terms.
The fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) does not include a discrete diagnosis to apply to children who have sensory differences, (meaning that they have difficulties regulating sensory input and such difficulties affect their ability to successfully relate to the world around them), but these differences are now part of the diagnostic criteria for ASD. The literature indicates that a majority of youth with ASD demonstrate features of sensory overresponsiveness (JAMA Psychiatry. 2015 Aug;72[8]:778-86), and providers should rightfully be concerned about the possibility of autism in a youngster who is presenting with severe negative responses to auditory, visual, and/or tactile stimuli.
Notably, however, even though sensory problems are considered a feature of autism, they are not pathognomonic for the disorder, and most children with these problems are, in fact, not autistic. Children with deficits in their ability to modulate sensory stimuli can present with a wide range of emotional-behavioral problems, including externalizing behaviors and internalizing symptoms manifesting with anxiety, attention challenges, mood dysregulation, and overall poor adaptive functioning. The relationship between sensory issues (both underresponsiveness and overresponsiveness) and psychopathology is rather complicated as sensory dysfunction can exist independent of a psychiatric disorder, be a significant risk factor for the development of the disorder (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009 Nov;37[8]:1077-87), and have symptom overlap with the disorder.
All in all, in spite of this complexity, since the 1960’s (Am J Occup Ther. 1964 Jan-Feb;18:6-11), it’s been clear that sensory dysfunction in children is associated with impairments in development, learning, and self-regulation. Parents of these children experience elevated levels of stress (J Child Fam Stud. 2013 Oct 1;22[7]:912-21), and early identification of sensory differences, psychoeducation, and referral for treatment are critical to minimize these impacts and foster positive outcomes.
Case Summary
In gathering a history and administering the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS), it became clear that Sarah did not present with the social-communicative impairments that characterize ASD, but she did demonstrate repetitive hand flapping, troubles tolerating large social get-togethers, hypersensitivities, and a vulnerability to getting stuck when attempting to transition between activities. It is not uncommon for Sarah to use “fight-and-flight” reactions when faced with internal or external discomfort. Child Behavior Checklist data revealed multi-informant endorsement of clinical range symptoms across broad-band and narrow-band domains. Additionally, the Sensory Profile–2 yielded elevated scores in categories measuring sensory seeking and sensory sensitivity. The Sensory Profile is a standardized tool that uses caregiver and teacher-completed questionnaires to examine a child’s sensory processing abilities and provide data regarding the effect of such sensory processing on functional performance. Integrating all the available data, our team certainly appreciated Sarah’s profound sensory overresponsiveness, and a diagnosis of an unspecified anxiety disorder was provided along with consideration for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (with teacher input needed to further investigate this possibility). The family history revealed anxiety disorders occurring both maternally and paternally. Additionally, Sarah’s mother’s acknowledged having her own similar sensory issues as a child.
Discussion
Associations among anxiety, sensory overresponsiveness, and ADHD are recognized in the literature (Am J Occup Ther. 2009 Jul-Aug;63[4]:433-40) and have implications for treatment. Furthermore, there is evidence that there is a heritable aspect to sensory processing abnormalities, and tactile defensiveness is associated with fearful temperament and anxiety (J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2006 Jun;34[3]:393-407). In Sarah’s case, her intense behavioral response to ordinary sensory stimuli was striking, and she had not yet been referred for an occupational therapy evaluation, which was the primary recommendation to further assess and understand her complicated sensory profile. As one component of a comprehensive treatment plan, an occupational therapist (www.aota.org), by using evidence-based practices in a sensory-integration framework, could be helpful in addressing Sarah’s range of challenges and promoting positive outcomes related to socialization, behavioral regulation, and attention. Occupational therapists, with assistance from other team members, also could work with Sarah and her family on developing relaxation skills and use exposure and response prevention–oriented intervention strategies to address anxieties. Families, however, should be counseled about the limited data on the use of sensory-based therapies (Pediatrics. 2012 Jun;129[6]:1186-9); the use of parent-management training/family coaching should also be a treatment consideration to help promote overall regulatory functioning in the household.
Clinical pearl
When encountering youth with sensory-related challenges, a clinician’s diagnostic considerations should be more than just thinking about the possibility of an autism spectrum disorder. Symptoms of sensory overresponsiveness are associated with other emotional-behavioral conditions, but also can be seen without co-occurring psychopathology. With the latter, however, providers should be mindful that family-related impairments still may be quite noteworthy (J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;50[12]:1210-9) and associated behavior problems could be attributed incorrectly to other diagnoses (which may lead to the recommendation of ineffective and inappropriate treatments). Much more research is needed to help develop a robust framework for diagnosing and labeling sensory issues in children and studying the efficacy of available intervention strategies.
Dr. Dickerson, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, is assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont, Burlington, where he is director of the autism diagnostic clinic.
Parenting: Tips on discussing a tough but important topic
It seems like the field of psychiatry has been all over the map when it comes to viewing the importance of parenting with regard to child behavioral problems and disorders. For decades, we heard that parents, particularly mothers, were to blame for everything from childhood autism to excessive temper tantrums.1 Then, parenting somehow got somewhat pushed aside as the genetic and biological underpinnings of behavior became increasingly appreciated. For a while, parenting was nearly relegated to epiphenomenon status – that is, an almost irrelevant reaction to genetically driven child behavior.
More recently, it appears that some semblance of balance has been restored with parenting behavior being appreciated as critically important in the development of a child, but in the context of many other mutually interacting factors.2 There also is a far greater understanding that child behavior and parent behavior is very much a two-way street.
These more nuanced and neuroscience-backed perspectives, however, don’t make bringing up the subject of parenting any easier. In part because of how seriously most mothers, fathers, and other caretakers take their job as a parent, it can be easy to put parents on the defensive, especially when one of their children is struggling behaviorally. At the same time, taking the easy way out by giving boilerplate advice, or even avoiding the topic of parenting completely, is a huge missed opportunity to engage families who often are desperately seeking some guidance.
Case summary
Emily is a healthy 6-year-old girl who comes in with her single mother and her two younger siblings for an annual exam. Her mother proudly reports that she is doing great at school, but seems reluctant to say much about her home life. The mother seems somewhat frazzled, and the interview is difficult because the three siblings are arguing with each other. After Emily and her sister fight over reading the same book, the mother suddenly and quite loudly says, “Can you just let me talk for 1 second!”
Discussion
Pediatricians often have strong suspicions that parents are struggling with a child’s behavior but can have trouble knowing how exactly to bring up the subject of parenting. Some specific suggestions for having productive discussions on parenting include the following:
• Think about the statements embedded in your questions. A screening question about parenting such as, “Can you tell me about the areas of parenting that you are most proud of and the areas where you feel you need the most help?” helps a parent understand that you assume that no parent is perfect and that everyone has areas of strength and weakness.
• Compliment when you can. Related to the above, find those areas of positive parenting, even if it involves effort more than results, and communicate that you have noticed them. This can make talking about the weaknesses a little easier to hear for the parent.
• Frame the issue in terms of surpluses rather than deficits. Instead of coming from the perspective that a parent is deficient in their basic parenting skills, reframe the challenge as someone needing “superparent” skills to manage multiple or more challenging children. The often-heard statements that “kids don’t come with instruction books” or “you need to earn a license to drive a car but not raise a child” are almost cliché these days, but still convey to parents that you understand how difficult parenting can be. In some cases, it may be appropriate to disclose some parenting challenges you have experienced firsthand.
• Get details. Before launching into specific recommendations, ask yourself if you are able to really see the issue a parent is describing. Rather than reviewing a laundry list of sleep hygiene recommendations, for example, it can be very worthwhile to ask, “How exactly does bedtime work at your home?” Getting all the details can not only build empathy, but allow you to really see specific areas for improvement. If you can’t paint a picture of how a scene might really look at this patient’s home, there likely is more to learn.
Of course, one of the key challenges here is time. Really giving these parenting concerns the time they deserve usually means going beyond the precious few minutes pediatricians have for a well visit. In these instances, it may be worth scheduling a future appointment that is exclusively devoted to this issue. Alternatively, a referral can be made to a therapist, counselor, or parent “coach” to give a family greater opportunity to work 1:1 with a professional. When you do this, be clear that you are looking for a therapist to work with the whole family, ideally using many of the evidence-based techniques that have been shown to be effective. A list of manual-based treatments as well as some books that parents could read on their own to address oppositional-defiant behavior is available, including a guide for families from the American Academy from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.3
Case follow-up
The pediatrician finds another book to satisfy the younger sibling and says to the mother, “I’m glad to see that at least they are fighting over a book. That’s great that you have taught them to like reading.” They commiserate about how difficult it is to raise three young children as a single parent, and the mother then begins to open up about Emily’s defiant and disrespectful behavior at home that the mother blames on herself. The pediatrician offers a referral to see a local family therapist, which the mother gratefully accepts.
References
1. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1985 Jul;55(3):345-53.
2. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2016 Apr;25(2):167-78.
3. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2009). Oppositional Defiant Disorder: A Guide for Families.
Dr. Rettew is associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. Email him at [email protected].
It seems like the field of psychiatry has been all over the map when it comes to viewing the importance of parenting with regard to child behavioral problems and disorders. For decades, we heard that parents, particularly mothers, were to blame for everything from childhood autism to excessive temper tantrums.1 Then, parenting somehow got somewhat pushed aside as the genetic and biological underpinnings of behavior became increasingly appreciated. For a while, parenting was nearly relegated to epiphenomenon status – that is, an almost irrelevant reaction to genetically driven child behavior.
More recently, it appears that some semblance of balance has been restored with parenting behavior being appreciated as critically important in the development of a child, but in the context of many other mutually interacting factors.2 There also is a far greater understanding that child behavior and parent behavior is very much a two-way street.
These more nuanced and neuroscience-backed perspectives, however, don’t make bringing up the subject of parenting any easier. In part because of how seriously most mothers, fathers, and other caretakers take their job as a parent, it can be easy to put parents on the defensive, especially when one of their children is struggling behaviorally. At the same time, taking the easy way out by giving boilerplate advice, or even avoiding the topic of parenting completely, is a huge missed opportunity to engage families who often are desperately seeking some guidance.
Case summary
Emily is a healthy 6-year-old girl who comes in with her single mother and her two younger siblings for an annual exam. Her mother proudly reports that she is doing great at school, but seems reluctant to say much about her home life. The mother seems somewhat frazzled, and the interview is difficult because the three siblings are arguing with each other. After Emily and her sister fight over reading the same book, the mother suddenly and quite loudly says, “Can you just let me talk for 1 second!”
Discussion
Pediatricians often have strong suspicions that parents are struggling with a child’s behavior but can have trouble knowing how exactly to bring up the subject of parenting. Some specific suggestions for having productive discussions on parenting include the following:
• Think about the statements embedded in your questions. A screening question about parenting such as, “Can you tell me about the areas of parenting that you are most proud of and the areas where you feel you need the most help?” helps a parent understand that you assume that no parent is perfect and that everyone has areas of strength and weakness.
• Compliment when you can. Related to the above, find those areas of positive parenting, even if it involves effort more than results, and communicate that you have noticed them. This can make talking about the weaknesses a little easier to hear for the parent.
• Frame the issue in terms of surpluses rather than deficits. Instead of coming from the perspective that a parent is deficient in their basic parenting skills, reframe the challenge as someone needing “superparent” skills to manage multiple or more challenging children. The often-heard statements that “kids don’t come with instruction books” or “you need to earn a license to drive a car but not raise a child” are almost cliché these days, but still convey to parents that you understand how difficult parenting can be. In some cases, it may be appropriate to disclose some parenting challenges you have experienced firsthand.
• Get details. Before launching into specific recommendations, ask yourself if you are able to really see the issue a parent is describing. Rather than reviewing a laundry list of sleep hygiene recommendations, for example, it can be very worthwhile to ask, “How exactly does bedtime work at your home?” Getting all the details can not only build empathy, but allow you to really see specific areas for improvement. If you can’t paint a picture of how a scene might really look at this patient’s home, there likely is more to learn.
Of course, one of the key challenges here is time. Really giving these parenting concerns the time they deserve usually means going beyond the precious few minutes pediatricians have for a well visit. In these instances, it may be worth scheduling a future appointment that is exclusively devoted to this issue. Alternatively, a referral can be made to a therapist, counselor, or parent “coach” to give a family greater opportunity to work 1:1 with a professional. When you do this, be clear that you are looking for a therapist to work with the whole family, ideally using many of the evidence-based techniques that have been shown to be effective. A list of manual-based treatments as well as some books that parents could read on their own to address oppositional-defiant behavior is available, including a guide for families from the American Academy from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.3
Case follow-up
The pediatrician finds another book to satisfy the younger sibling and says to the mother, “I’m glad to see that at least they are fighting over a book. That’s great that you have taught them to like reading.” They commiserate about how difficult it is to raise three young children as a single parent, and the mother then begins to open up about Emily’s defiant and disrespectful behavior at home that the mother blames on herself. The pediatrician offers a referral to see a local family therapist, which the mother gratefully accepts.
References
1. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1985 Jul;55(3):345-53.
2. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2016 Apr;25(2):167-78.
3. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2009). Oppositional Defiant Disorder: A Guide for Families.
Dr. Rettew is associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. Email him at [email protected].
It seems like the field of psychiatry has been all over the map when it comes to viewing the importance of parenting with regard to child behavioral problems and disorders. For decades, we heard that parents, particularly mothers, were to blame for everything from childhood autism to excessive temper tantrums.1 Then, parenting somehow got somewhat pushed aside as the genetic and biological underpinnings of behavior became increasingly appreciated. For a while, parenting was nearly relegated to epiphenomenon status – that is, an almost irrelevant reaction to genetically driven child behavior.
More recently, it appears that some semblance of balance has been restored with parenting behavior being appreciated as critically important in the development of a child, but in the context of many other mutually interacting factors.2 There also is a far greater understanding that child behavior and parent behavior is very much a two-way street.
These more nuanced and neuroscience-backed perspectives, however, don’t make bringing up the subject of parenting any easier. In part because of how seriously most mothers, fathers, and other caretakers take their job as a parent, it can be easy to put parents on the defensive, especially when one of their children is struggling behaviorally. At the same time, taking the easy way out by giving boilerplate advice, or even avoiding the topic of parenting completely, is a huge missed opportunity to engage families who often are desperately seeking some guidance.
Case summary
Emily is a healthy 6-year-old girl who comes in with her single mother and her two younger siblings for an annual exam. Her mother proudly reports that she is doing great at school, but seems reluctant to say much about her home life. The mother seems somewhat frazzled, and the interview is difficult because the three siblings are arguing with each other. After Emily and her sister fight over reading the same book, the mother suddenly and quite loudly says, “Can you just let me talk for 1 second!”
Discussion
Pediatricians often have strong suspicions that parents are struggling with a child’s behavior but can have trouble knowing how exactly to bring up the subject of parenting. Some specific suggestions for having productive discussions on parenting include the following:
• Think about the statements embedded in your questions. A screening question about parenting such as, “Can you tell me about the areas of parenting that you are most proud of and the areas where you feel you need the most help?” helps a parent understand that you assume that no parent is perfect and that everyone has areas of strength and weakness.
• Compliment when you can. Related to the above, find those areas of positive parenting, even if it involves effort more than results, and communicate that you have noticed them. This can make talking about the weaknesses a little easier to hear for the parent.
• Frame the issue in terms of surpluses rather than deficits. Instead of coming from the perspective that a parent is deficient in their basic parenting skills, reframe the challenge as someone needing “superparent” skills to manage multiple or more challenging children. The often-heard statements that “kids don’t come with instruction books” or “you need to earn a license to drive a car but not raise a child” are almost cliché these days, but still convey to parents that you understand how difficult parenting can be. In some cases, it may be appropriate to disclose some parenting challenges you have experienced firsthand.
• Get details. Before launching into specific recommendations, ask yourself if you are able to really see the issue a parent is describing. Rather than reviewing a laundry list of sleep hygiene recommendations, for example, it can be very worthwhile to ask, “How exactly does bedtime work at your home?” Getting all the details can not only build empathy, but allow you to really see specific areas for improvement. If you can’t paint a picture of how a scene might really look at this patient’s home, there likely is more to learn.
Of course, one of the key challenges here is time. Really giving these parenting concerns the time they deserve usually means going beyond the precious few minutes pediatricians have for a well visit. In these instances, it may be worth scheduling a future appointment that is exclusively devoted to this issue. Alternatively, a referral can be made to a therapist, counselor, or parent “coach” to give a family greater opportunity to work 1:1 with a professional. When you do this, be clear that you are looking for a therapist to work with the whole family, ideally using many of the evidence-based techniques that have been shown to be effective. A list of manual-based treatments as well as some books that parents could read on their own to address oppositional-defiant behavior is available, including a guide for families from the American Academy from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.3
Case follow-up
The pediatrician finds another book to satisfy the younger sibling and says to the mother, “I’m glad to see that at least they are fighting over a book. That’s great that you have taught them to like reading.” They commiserate about how difficult it is to raise three young children as a single parent, and the mother then begins to open up about Emily’s defiant and disrespectful behavior at home that the mother blames on herself. The pediatrician offers a referral to see a local family therapist, which the mother gratefully accepts.
References
1. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1985 Jul;55(3):345-53.
2. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2016 Apr;25(2):167-78.
3. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2009). Oppositional Defiant Disorder: A Guide for Families.
Dr. Rettew is associate professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. Email him at [email protected].
Leveraging what is available
Illicit drug use in the United States continues to rise. In 2014, 27 million people reported using an illicit drug in the previous 30 days. This corresponds to nearly 1 in every 10 Americans.
Use of marijuana has the highest prevalence, followed distantly by pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and cocaine. Resources for drug users who want to quit are difficult to access – and even if those resources are available, they may be constrained.
For patients struggling with alcohol dependence who want to quit, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) is the most well-known and ubiquitous 12-step mutual help organization (MHO). Other MHOs, such as Narcotics Anonymous (NA), exist for illicit substances such as opiates (e.g., heroin), stimulants, or cannabis. Shared experiences are hypothesized to maximize therapeutic benefit.
But what, then, should we do if somebody struggling with illicit substance dependence wants to remain abstinent from drugs and there are only AA groups around?
Harvard investigators suggest that support from AA for patients with illicit substance addiction is not associated with early discontinuation or compromised recovery. To evaluate this, researchers examined treatment outcomes among young adults participating in residential treatment in Minnesota (Alcohol Alcohol. 2014 Nov;49[6]:645-3).
Four groups of patients with drug use disorder were evaluated: alcohol, cannabis, opiates, or stimulants. The goal was to compare the relative success of individuals with fellowship “mismatch” (e.g., attending AA but was a primary user of cannabis), compared with those who had a fellowship match. Success during aftercare was defined as percentage of days abstinent and attendance at the MHO.
Investigators observed that in the first 3 months after discharge from the residential treatment program, a significant proportion (79%) of the meetings attended by the cannabis, opiates, or stimulant users were AA meetings. This mismatch was unrelated to 12-step attendance at 6 and 12 months, or to percentage of days abstinent.
Available literature suggests that 12-step MHO participation is a predictor of better treatment outcomes. The findings from this study suggest that AA attendance among patients recovering from cannabis, opiates, or stimulant use disorder is beneficial. Patients with illicit drug use disorder should be encouraged to attend AA if other MHOs are not accessible.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no financial disclosures relevant to this article.
Illicit drug use in the United States continues to rise. In 2014, 27 million people reported using an illicit drug in the previous 30 days. This corresponds to nearly 1 in every 10 Americans.
Use of marijuana has the highest prevalence, followed distantly by pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and cocaine. Resources for drug users who want to quit are difficult to access – and even if those resources are available, they may be constrained.
For patients struggling with alcohol dependence who want to quit, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) is the most well-known and ubiquitous 12-step mutual help organization (MHO). Other MHOs, such as Narcotics Anonymous (NA), exist for illicit substances such as opiates (e.g., heroin), stimulants, or cannabis. Shared experiences are hypothesized to maximize therapeutic benefit.
But what, then, should we do if somebody struggling with illicit substance dependence wants to remain abstinent from drugs and there are only AA groups around?
Harvard investigators suggest that support from AA for patients with illicit substance addiction is not associated with early discontinuation or compromised recovery. To evaluate this, researchers examined treatment outcomes among young adults participating in residential treatment in Minnesota (Alcohol Alcohol. 2014 Nov;49[6]:645-3).
Four groups of patients with drug use disorder were evaluated: alcohol, cannabis, opiates, or stimulants. The goal was to compare the relative success of individuals with fellowship “mismatch” (e.g., attending AA but was a primary user of cannabis), compared with those who had a fellowship match. Success during aftercare was defined as percentage of days abstinent and attendance at the MHO.
Investigators observed that in the first 3 months after discharge from the residential treatment program, a significant proportion (79%) of the meetings attended by the cannabis, opiates, or stimulant users were AA meetings. This mismatch was unrelated to 12-step attendance at 6 and 12 months, or to percentage of days abstinent.
Available literature suggests that 12-step MHO participation is a predictor of better treatment outcomes. The findings from this study suggest that AA attendance among patients recovering from cannabis, opiates, or stimulant use disorder is beneficial. Patients with illicit drug use disorder should be encouraged to attend AA if other MHOs are not accessible.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no financial disclosures relevant to this article.
Illicit drug use in the United States continues to rise. In 2014, 27 million people reported using an illicit drug in the previous 30 days. This corresponds to nearly 1 in every 10 Americans.
Use of marijuana has the highest prevalence, followed distantly by pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and cocaine. Resources for drug users who want to quit are difficult to access – and even if those resources are available, they may be constrained.
For patients struggling with alcohol dependence who want to quit, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) is the most well-known and ubiquitous 12-step mutual help organization (MHO). Other MHOs, such as Narcotics Anonymous (NA), exist for illicit substances such as opiates (e.g., heroin), stimulants, or cannabis. Shared experiences are hypothesized to maximize therapeutic benefit.
But what, then, should we do if somebody struggling with illicit substance dependence wants to remain abstinent from drugs and there are only AA groups around?
Harvard investigators suggest that support from AA for patients with illicit substance addiction is not associated with early discontinuation or compromised recovery. To evaluate this, researchers examined treatment outcomes among young adults participating in residential treatment in Minnesota (Alcohol Alcohol. 2014 Nov;49[6]:645-3).
Four groups of patients with drug use disorder were evaluated: alcohol, cannabis, opiates, or stimulants. The goal was to compare the relative success of individuals with fellowship “mismatch” (e.g., attending AA but was a primary user of cannabis), compared with those who had a fellowship match. Success during aftercare was defined as percentage of days abstinent and attendance at the MHO.
Investigators observed that in the first 3 months after discharge from the residential treatment program, a significant proportion (79%) of the meetings attended by the cannabis, opiates, or stimulant users were AA meetings. This mismatch was unrelated to 12-step attendance at 6 and 12 months, or to percentage of days abstinent.
Available literature suggests that 12-step MHO participation is a predictor of better treatment outcomes. The findings from this study suggest that AA attendance among patients recovering from cannabis, opiates, or stimulant use disorder is beneficial. Patients with illicit drug use disorder should be encouraged to attend AA if other MHOs are not accessible.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of the Mayo Clinic. The opinions expressed in this article should not be used to diagnose or treat any medical condition, nor should they be used as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified, board-certified practicing clinician. Dr. Ebbert has no financial disclosures relevant to this article.
Blue and white light for seasonal affective disorder
Perhaps it’s the northern climate. Perhaps it’s that people at my office work a lot in the absence of office windows. But there are a lot of seasonal affective disorder lamps around me.
The one in my office turns on automatically (frequently in my absence), and the eerie blue light from my office floods the cubicles outside my door.
At a social gathering the other day, I related the story of my “moody blues office,” and somebody asked if the blue light for seasonal affective disorder was better than the white light. I did not know, so I did some reading.
It turns out that there is a retinal photoreceptor in the ganglion cells with a maximum sensitivity of 470-490 nm to blue light. These non-image–forming photoreceptors play a role in regulating the biological clock. Experiments have been conducted evaluating the impact of different wavelengths of light on symptoms of SAD.
In a study of people with subsyndromal SAD, investigators randomized 48 participants to bright white fluorescent light or narrow-band blue light (peak LED wavelength, 470 nm). Patients were exposed to the light for 20 minutes on 5 consecutive days. Standard scales measuring mood and fatigue were administered (BMC Psychiatry. 2016 Feb 18;16:27).
Investigators did not detect differences between the groups, and the authors concluded they had comparable efficacy.
Although the sample size is small, the data suggest that blue light is comparable to white light. I will start needing to pay attention if the folks in the cubicles outside my office are less depressed.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
Perhaps it’s the northern climate. Perhaps it’s that people at my office work a lot in the absence of office windows. But there are a lot of seasonal affective disorder lamps around me.
The one in my office turns on automatically (frequently in my absence), and the eerie blue light from my office floods the cubicles outside my door.
At a social gathering the other day, I related the story of my “moody blues office,” and somebody asked if the blue light for seasonal affective disorder was better than the white light. I did not know, so I did some reading.
It turns out that there is a retinal photoreceptor in the ganglion cells with a maximum sensitivity of 470-490 nm to blue light. These non-image–forming photoreceptors play a role in regulating the biological clock. Experiments have been conducted evaluating the impact of different wavelengths of light on symptoms of SAD.
In a study of people with subsyndromal SAD, investigators randomized 48 participants to bright white fluorescent light or narrow-band blue light (peak LED wavelength, 470 nm). Patients were exposed to the light for 20 minutes on 5 consecutive days. Standard scales measuring mood and fatigue were administered (BMC Psychiatry. 2016 Feb 18;16:27).
Investigators did not detect differences between the groups, and the authors concluded they had comparable efficacy.
Although the sample size is small, the data suggest that blue light is comparable to white light. I will start needing to pay attention if the folks in the cubicles outside my office are less depressed.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
Perhaps it’s the northern climate. Perhaps it’s that people at my office work a lot in the absence of office windows. But there are a lot of seasonal affective disorder lamps around me.
The one in my office turns on automatically (frequently in my absence), and the eerie blue light from my office floods the cubicles outside my door.
At a social gathering the other day, I related the story of my “moody blues office,” and somebody asked if the blue light for seasonal affective disorder was better than the white light. I did not know, so I did some reading.
It turns out that there is a retinal photoreceptor in the ganglion cells with a maximum sensitivity of 470-490 nm to blue light. These non-image–forming photoreceptors play a role in regulating the biological clock. Experiments have been conducted evaluating the impact of different wavelengths of light on symptoms of SAD.
In a study of people with subsyndromal SAD, investigators randomized 48 participants to bright white fluorescent light or narrow-band blue light (peak LED wavelength, 470 nm). Patients were exposed to the light for 20 minutes on 5 consecutive days. Standard scales measuring mood and fatigue were administered (BMC Psychiatry. 2016 Feb 18;16:27).
Investigators did not detect differences between the groups, and the authors concluded they had comparable efficacy.
Although the sample size is small, the data suggest that blue light is comparable to white light. I will start needing to pay attention if the folks in the cubicles outside my office are less depressed.
Dr. Ebbert is professor of medicine, a general internist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and a diplomate of the American Board of Addiction Medicine. Dr. Ebbert has no relevant financial disclosures about this article.
Treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder
Traumatic events are extremely common, with as many as 60% of children experiencing some trauma by age 18 years. About 15% of these children will develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Case summary
Jane is a 13-year-old girl who presented because of steadily escalating angry outbursts with her mother, irritable mood, and anxiety since her father went to jail 2 years previously. Prior to the father’s departure from the family, he drank heavily and had been physically violent to Jane’s mother through most of Jane’s life.
Since these events, Jane has been extremely angry and irritable, often fighting extensively with her younger sister. She has severe difficulty separating from her mother, often following her around or demanding to know everything that her mother is doing. Jane herself reports that she feels worried, irritable, and sad much of the time. She is especially angry when thinking about anything related to her father. Jane won’t talk about her father to anyone, except occasionally her mother and one friend. She has difficulty falling asleep and has nightmares. She never thinks about the future, and instead just lives day to day. Images from the past come vividly into her mind. She has highly negative, hopeless views of the world, and doesn’t trust people, so she is unwilling to consider any therapy. Jane’s mother also is highly irritable and snaps at Jane over small things while in the office.
Discussion
The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD require that an individual has been exposed to a severe stressor that threatens death, serious injury, or sexual violence through direct experience, witnessing the event happening to others, or learning that the event happened to a close family member or friend. Not all people who experience such events will develop PTSD, however. Additional symptoms are grouped into four areas (rather than three as in the DSM-IV), and a diagnosis requires one or two symptoms in each area:
• Intrusive symptoms including intrusive distressing memories, recurrent dreams with content related to the event, dissociative reactions such as flashbacks, intense distress at exposure to triggers that remind individuals of the event, or marked physiologic reactions to triggers.
• Avoidance of stimuli associated with the event, either memories or thoughts or external reminders.
• Negative cognitions manifesting as changes in thoughts and mood beginning or worsening after the event. These are an inability to remember the event, persistent negative beliefs about oneself or the world, distorted thoughts about the cause or results of the event, persistent negative emotional states such as anger or guilt, decreased participation in activities, feelings of estrangement from others, or an inability to experience positive emotions.
• Changes in arousal and reactivity as shown by irritable behavior, reckless behavior, hypervigilance, an exaggerated startle response, concentration problems, or sleep disturbance.
There are several screening instruments for the presence of a history of traumatic events as well as for symptoms of PTSD. The Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS) is one example of a simple, readily available screening tool. More extensive assessment is an important part of treatment by mental health clinicians.
Treatment
Psychotherapy interventions are the core of treatment for PTSD in young people. Interventions based on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) are the most extensively researched, with trauma-focused CBT (TF-CBT) being the specific intervention with the most research (13 randomized controlled trials showing efficacy) for children and adolescents. There are several other approaches that have evidence of efficacy through randomized controlled trials, and have been specifically studied for different ages, cultural groups, and focus of intervention (group, family, classroom). Child-parent psychotherapy focuses on traumatized 3-to 5-year-olds and works with both parent and child. Eye movement desensitization and preprocessing therapy (EMDR), extensively studied for adults, has some randomized controlled trials in children. The National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) has a website listing evidence-based interventions with descriptions of the extent of the evidence for these and other interventions, including the population for which the intervention was designed and information on training and dissemination.
A recent meta-analysis by Morina et al. identified 39 randomized controlled trials with psychological interventions targeting PTSD in children and youth and found a large (0.83) overall effect size vs. wait list control, and a moderate (0.41) effect size vs. an active control such as supportive therapy. There were enough randomized controlled trials to analyze the TF-CBT–based interventions as a group, and these had even larger effect sizes: 1.44 vs. wait list and 0.66 vs. active control. The non-CBT approaches did not have enough studies to be evaluated separately (Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Jul;47:41-54).
It is important to know which available therapists are trained in specific interventions such as TF-CBT and review the evidence behind other interventions that therapists are using. Advocacy for the training of local therapists, particularly therapists who are affiliated with your practice, can increase these resources.
The evidence for pharmacologic treatment for PTSD in children and adolescents, in contrast to adults, is very thin. In adults, SSRIs have shown a significant benefit, but there have been three randomized controlled trials examining this question in young people with no significant difference shown for the SSRI. One of these compared TF-CBT alone to TF-CBT plus sertraline, with no added benefit for sertraline. A second compared sertraline to placebo and showed no difference, and the third was an extremely brief trial of 1 week of fluoxetine for children with burns, with no effect. There are open label studies of citalopram that have shown some benefit.
Prazosin is an alpha-1 antagonist that decreases the effect of peripheral norepinephrine, which has been shown to decrease reactivity in adults through two randomized controlled trials, but there are case reports in adolescents only. Guanfacine, an alpha-2 agonist that acts centrally to decrease norepinephrine release, has one open label study of the extended-release form in adolescents showing benefit, but there are two negative randomized controlled trials in adults. Other agents such as second-generation antipsychotics and mood stabilizers (specifically carbamazepine and valproic acid) have open label studies in children only and have the potential for significant side effects.
Psychotherapy is clearly the treatment of choice for children and adolescents with PTSD; the difficulty is that avoidance and difficulty trusting people are core symptoms of PTSD, and can lead patients to be extremely reluctant to try therapy. As a pediatrician, you likely already have a trusting relationship with your patient and parent(s), which can provide an opening for discussion.
Psychoeducation about trauma and the specific trauma a child has experienced is a core component and often the first step of PTSD treatment. The NCTSN website provides a goldmine of information about specific types of trauma (found under the tab labeled trauma types), including common symptoms at different developmental stages and specific resources. By providing information to families in a sensitive way, clinicians can help people understand that they are not alone, that their struggles are common reactions to the type of trauma they have experienced, and that people can recover with therapy so that the trauma does not have to go on negatively affecting their lives.
Finally, noting a parent’s possible trauma, and encouraging that parent to get his or her own treatment in order to help the child, can be a crucial first step.
General references
Dr. Hall is assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
Traumatic events are extremely common, with as many as 60% of children experiencing some trauma by age 18 years. About 15% of these children will develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Case summary
Jane is a 13-year-old girl who presented because of steadily escalating angry outbursts with her mother, irritable mood, and anxiety since her father went to jail 2 years previously. Prior to the father’s departure from the family, he drank heavily and had been physically violent to Jane’s mother through most of Jane’s life.
Since these events, Jane has been extremely angry and irritable, often fighting extensively with her younger sister. She has severe difficulty separating from her mother, often following her around or demanding to know everything that her mother is doing. Jane herself reports that she feels worried, irritable, and sad much of the time. She is especially angry when thinking about anything related to her father. Jane won’t talk about her father to anyone, except occasionally her mother and one friend. She has difficulty falling asleep and has nightmares. She never thinks about the future, and instead just lives day to day. Images from the past come vividly into her mind. She has highly negative, hopeless views of the world, and doesn’t trust people, so she is unwilling to consider any therapy. Jane’s mother also is highly irritable and snaps at Jane over small things while in the office.
Discussion
The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD require that an individual has been exposed to a severe stressor that threatens death, serious injury, or sexual violence through direct experience, witnessing the event happening to others, or learning that the event happened to a close family member or friend. Not all people who experience such events will develop PTSD, however. Additional symptoms are grouped into four areas (rather than three as in the DSM-IV), and a diagnosis requires one or two symptoms in each area:
• Intrusive symptoms including intrusive distressing memories, recurrent dreams with content related to the event, dissociative reactions such as flashbacks, intense distress at exposure to triggers that remind individuals of the event, or marked physiologic reactions to triggers.
• Avoidance of stimuli associated with the event, either memories or thoughts or external reminders.
• Negative cognitions manifesting as changes in thoughts and mood beginning or worsening after the event. These are an inability to remember the event, persistent negative beliefs about oneself or the world, distorted thoughts about the cause or results of the event, persistent negative emotional states such as anger or guilt, decreased participation in activities, feelings of estrangement from others, or an inability to experience positive emotions.
• Changes in arousal and reactivity as shown by irritable behavior, reckless behavior, hypervigilance, an exaggerated startle response, concentration problems, or sleep disturbance.
There are several screening instruments for the presence of a history of traumatic events as well as for symptoms of PTSD. The Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS) is one example of a simple, readily available screening tool. More extensive assessment is an important part of treatment by mental health clinicians.
Treatment
Psychotherapy interventions are the core of treatment for PTSD in young people. Interventions based on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) are the most extensively researched, with trauma-focused CBT (TF-CBT) being the specific intervention with the most research (13 randomized controlled trials showing efficacy) for children and adolescents. There are several other approaches that have evidence of efficacy through randomized controlled trials, and have been specifically studied for different ages, cultural groups, and focus of intervention (group, family, classroom). Child-parent psychotherapy focuses on traumatized 3-to 5-year-olds and works with both parent and child. Eye movement desensitization and preprocessing therapy (EMDR), extensively studied for adults, has some randomized controlled trials in children. The National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) has a website listing evidence-based interventions with descriptions of the extent of the evidence for these and other interventions, including the population for which the intervention was designed and information on training and dissemination.
A recent meta-analysis by Morina et al. identified 39 randomized controlled trials with psychological interventions targeting PTSD in children and youth and found a large (0.83) overall effect size vs. wait list control, and a moderate (0.41) effect size vs. an active control such as supportive therapy. There were enough randomized controlled trials to analyze the TF-CBT–based interventions as a group, and these had even larger effect sizes: 1.44 vs. wait list and 0.66 vs. active control. The non-CBT approaches did not have enough studies to be evaluated separately (Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Jul;47:41-54).
It is important to know which available therapists are trained in specific interventions such as TF-CBT and review the evidence behind other interventions that therapists are using. Advocacy for the training of local therapists, particularly therapists who are affiliated with your practice, can increase these resources.
The evidence for pharmacologic treatment for PTSD in children and adolescents, in contrast to adults, is very thin. In adults, SSRIs have shown a significant benefit, but there have been three randomized controlled trials examining this question in young people with no significant difference shown for the SSRI. One of these compared TF-CBT alone to TF-CBT plus sertraline, with no added benefit for sertraline. A second compared sertraline to placebo and showed no difference, and the third was an extremely brief trial of 1 week of fluoxetine for children with burns, with no effect. There are open label studies of citalopram that have shown some benefit.
Prazosin is an alpha-1 antagonist that decreases the effect of peripheral norepinephrine, which has been shown to decrease reactivity in adults through two randomized controlled trials, but there are case reports in adolescents only. Guanfacine, an alpha-2 agonist that acts centrally to decrease norepinephrine release, has one open label study of the extended-release form in adolescents showing benefit, but there are two negative randomized controlled trials in adults. Other agents such as second-generation antipsychotics and mood stabilizers (specifically carbamazepine and valproic acid) have open label studies in children only and have the potential for significant side effects.
Psychotherapy is clearly the treatment of choice for children and adolescents with PTSD; the difficulty is that avoidance and difficulty trusting people are core symptoms of PTSD, and can lead patients to be extremely reluctant to try therapy. As a pediatrician, you likely already have a trusting relationship with your patient and parent(s), which can provide an opening for discussion.
Psychoeducation about trauma and the specific trauma a child has experienced is a core component and often the first step of PTSD treatment. The NCTSN website provides a goldmine of information about specific types of trauma (found under the tab labeled trauma types), including common symptoms at different developmental stages and specific resources. By providing information to families in a sensitive way, clinicians can help people understand that they are not alone, that their struggles are common reactions to the type of trauma they have experienced, and that people can recover with therapy so that the trauma does not have to go on negatively affecting their lives.
Finally, noting a parent’s possible trauma, and encouraging that parent to get his or her own treatment in order to help the child, can be a crucial first step.
General references
Dr. Hall is assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
Traumatic events are extremely common, with as many as 60% of children experiencing some trauma by age 18 years. About 15% of these children will develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Case summary
Jane is a 13-year-old girl who presented because of steadily escalating angry outbursts with her mother, irritable mood, and anxiety since her father went to jail 2 years previously. Prior to the father’s departure from the family, he drank heavily and had been physically violent to Jane’s mother through most of Jane’s life.
Since these events, Jane has been extremely angry and irritable, often fighting extensively with her younger sister. She has severe difficulty separating from her mother, often following her around or demanding to know everything that her mother is doing. Jane herself reports that she feels worried, irritable, and sad much of the time. She is especially angry when thinking about anything related to her father. Jane won’t talk about her father to anyone, except occasionally her mother and one friend. She has difficulty falling asleep and has nightmares. She never thinks about the future, and instead just lives day to day. Images from the past come vividly into her mind. She has highly negative, hopeless views of the world, and doesn’t trust people, so she is unwilling to consider any therapy. Jane’s mother also is highly irritable and snaps at Jane over small things while in the office.
Discussion
The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD require that an individual has been exposed to a severe stressor that threatens death, serious injury, or sexual violence through direct experience, witnessing the event happening to others, or learning that the event happened to a close family member or friend. Not all people who experience such events will develop PTSD, however. Additional symptoms are grouped into four areas (rather than three as in the DSM-IV), and a diagnosis requires one or two symptoms in each area:
• Intrusive symptoms including intrusive distressing memories, recurrent dreams with content related to the event, dissociative reactions such as flashbacks, intense distress at exposure to triggers that remind individuals of the event, or marked physiologic reactions to triggers.
• Avoidance of stimuli associated with the event, either memories or thoughts or external reminders.
• Negative cognitions manifesting as changes in thoughts and mood beginning or worsening after the event. These are an inability to remember the event, persistent negative beliefs about oneself or the world, distorted thoughts about the cause or results of the event, persistent negative emotional states such as anger or guilt, decreased participation in activities, feelings of estrangement from others, or an inability to experience positive emotions.
• Changes in arousal and reactivity as shown by irritable behavior, reckless behavior, hypervigilance, an exaggerated startle response, concentration problems, or sleep disturbance.
There are several screening instruments for the presence of a history of traumatic events as well as for symptoms of PTSD. The Child PTSD Symptom Scale (CPSS) is one example of a simple, readily available screening tool. More extensive assessment is an important part of treatment by mental health clinicians.
Treatment
Psychotherapy interventions are the core of treatment for PTSD in young people. Interventions based on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) are the most extensively researched, with trauma-focused CBT (TF-CBT) being the specific intervention with the most research (13 randomized controlled trials showing efficacy) for children and adolescents. There are several other approaches that have evidence of efficacy through randomized controlled trials, and have been specifically studied for different ages, cultural groups, and focus of intervention (group, family, classroom). Child-parent psychotherapy focuses on traumatized 3-to 5-year-olds and works with both parent and child. Eye movement desensitization and preprocessing therapy (EMDR), extensively studied for adults, has some randomized controlled trials in children. The National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) has a website listing evidence-based interventions with descriptions of the extent of the evidence for these and other interventions, including the population for which the intervention was designed and information on training and dissemination.
A recent meta-analysis by Morina et al. identified 39 randomized controlled trials with psychological interventions targeting PTSD in children and youth and found a large (0.83) overall effect size vs. wait list control, and a moderate (0.41) effect size vs. an active control such as supportive therapy. There were enough randomized controlled trials to analyze the TF-CBT–based interventions as a group, and these had even larger effect sizes: 1.44 vs. wait list and 0.66 vs. active control. The non-CBT approaches did not have enough studies to be evaluated separately (Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Jul;47:41-54).
It is important to know which available therapists are trained in specific interventions such as TF-CBT and review the evidence behind other interventions that therapists are using. Advocacy for the training of local therapists, particularly therapists who are affiliated with your practice, can increase these resources.
The evidence for pharmacologic treatment for PTSD in children and adolescents, in contrast to adults, is very thin. In adults, SSRIs have shown a significant benefit, but there have been three randomized controlled trials examining this question in young people with no significant difference shown for the SSRI. One of these compared TF-CBT alone to TF-CBT plus sertraline, with no added benefit for sertraline. A second compared sertraline to placebo and showed no difference, and the third was an extremely brief trial of 1 week of fluoxetine for children with burns, with no effect. There are open label studies of citalopram that have shown some benefit.
Prazosin is an alpha-1 antagonist that decreases the effect of peripheral norepinephrine, which has been shown to decrease reactivity in adults through two randomized controlled trials, but there are case reports in adolescents only. Guanfacine, an alpha-2 agonist that acts centrally to decrease norepinephrine release, has one open label study of the extended-release form in adolescents showing benefit, but there are two negative randomized controlled trials in adults. Other agents such as second-generation antipsychotics and mood stabilizers (specifically carbamazepine and valproic acid) have open label studies in children only and have the potential for significant side effects.
Psychotherapy is clearly the treatment of choice for children and adolescents with PTSD; the difficulty is that avoidance and difficulty trusting people are core symptoms of PTSD, and can lead patients to be extremely reluctant to try therapy. As a pediatrician, you likely already have a trusting relationship with your patient and parent(s), which can provide an opening for discussion.
Psychoeducation about trauma and the specific trauma a child has experienced is a core component and often the first step of PTSD treatment. The NCTSN website provides a goldmine of information about specific types of trauma (found under the tab labeled trauma types), including common symptoms at different developmental stages and specific resources. By providing information to families in a sensitive way, clinicians can help people understand that they are not alone, that their struggles are common reactions to the type of trauma they have experienced, and that people can recover with therapy so that the trauma does not have to go on negatively affecting their lives.
Finally, noting a parent’s possible trauma, and encouraging that parent to get his or her own treatment in order to help the child, can be a crucial first step.
General references
Dr. Hall is assistant professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures.
