Pre-pubertal bipolar disorder: origins and current status of the controversy.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from epidemiological, clinical and high-risk studies has established that the peak period of risk for onset of bipolar disorder spans late adolescence and early adulthood. However, the proposal of the existence of a pre-pubertal form of bipolar disorder manifesting in early childhood created substantial debate. In this narrative review, the literature and contributing factors pertaining to the controversy surrounding the proposed pre-pubertal bipolar disorder subtype are discussed. The resolution of the debate and lessons learned are highlighted. MAIN BODY: In the mid 1990s US researchers proposed that chronic irritability and explosive temper in pre-pubertal children with pre-existing ADHD and/or other learning and developmental disorders might represent a variant of mania. A number of factors contributed to this proposal including severely ill children with no diagnostic home given changes in the ADHD DSM diagnostic criteria and over-reliance on symptoms and structured interviews rather than on a clinical assessment incorporating developmental history, social context and clinical course. Prospective studies of children at high familial risk did not support the proposed pre-pubertal bipolar phenotype; but rather provided convergent evidence that bipolar disorder onset in adolescence and early adulthood not uncommonly preceded by sleep and internalizing symptoms and most often debuting as depression in adolescence (after puberty). Epidemiological studies of population and hospital discharge data provided evidence that the pre-pubertal bipolar phenotype was largely a US driven phenomenon. CONCLUSIONS: Psychiatric diagnosis is particularly challenging given the current lack of objective biomarkers. However, validity and utility of clinical diagnoses can be strengthened if all available predictive information is used to formulate a diagnosis. As in other areas of medicine, critical information required to make a valid diagnosis includes developmental history, clinical course, family history and treatment response-weighed against the known trajectories of classical disorders. Moreover, given that psychiatric disorders are in evolution over childhood and adolescence and symptoms, in of themselves, are often non-specific, a thorough clinical assessment incorporating collateral history and psychosocial context is paramount. Such an approach might have avoided or at least brought a more timely resolution to the debate on pre-pubertal mania.

Legal dilemmas for clinicians involved in the care and treatment of children and young people with mental disorder.

BACKGROUND: The 2008 revised Mental Health Act Code of Practice describes the legal framework governing the admission to hospital and treatment of children and young people for mental disorders as complex. Clinicians are required to be conversant with common law principles as well as the Mental Health Act (MHA), Children Act, Mental Capacity Act (MCA), Family Law Reform Act, Human Rights Act, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Professionals working with the MHA and the MCA have a legal duty to have regard to the respective Codes of Practice (MHA Code and MCA Code). In addition there is a need to keep up-to-date with developments in case law. The recent guidance from the National Institute for Mental Health in England, 'The Legal Aspects of the Care and Treatment of Children and Young People with Mental Disorder' draws all of the legal regimes together and suggests pointers on the most appropriate course of action when the regimes overlap. DISCUSSION: This paper will aim to highlight legal dilemmas relating to the care and treatment of under 18-year-olds for mental disorder and to discuss the impact of these on clinical practice. The new legal framework will be discussed with reference to hypothetical cases. Key issues include age and maturity, capacity, deprivation of liberty and the zone of parental control (ZPC). CONCLUSIONS: It is essential that clinicians are aware of their responsibilities within the new legal framework in order to avoid becoming a target for litigation. This paper is aimed at meeting the recommendation for clinicians to be aware of their responsibilities and engage in appropriate training.

A randomised controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy in adolescents with major depression treated by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The ADAPT trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if, in the short term, depressed adolescents attending routine NHS Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS), and receiving ongoing active clinical care, treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) plus cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) compared with SSRI alone, results in better healthcare outcomes. DESIGN: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on depressed adolescents attending CAMHS who had not responded to a psychosocial brief initial intervention (BII) prior to randomisation. SETTING: Six English CAMHS participated in the study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 208 patients aged between 11 and 17 years were recruited and randomised. INTERVENTIONS: All participants received active routine clinical care in a CAMHS outpatient setting and an SSRI and half were offered CBT. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The duration of the trial was a 12-week treatment phase, followed by a 16-week maintenance phase. Follow-up assessments were at 6, 12 and 28 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA). Secondary outcome measures were self-report depressive symptoms, interviewer-rated depressive signs and symptoms, interviewer-rated psychosocial impairment and clinical global impression of response to treatment. Information on resource use was collected in interview at baseline and at the 12- and 28-week follow-up assessments using the Child and Adolescent Service Use Schedule (CA-SUS). RESULTS: Of the 208 patients randomised, 200 (96%) completed the trial to the primary end-point at 12 weeks. By the 28-week follow-up, 174 (84%) participants were re-evaluated. Overall, 193 (93%) participants had been assessed at one or more time points. Clinical characteristics indicated that the trial was conducted on a severely depressed group. There was significant recovery at all time points in both arms. The findings demonstrated no difference in treatment effectiveness for SSRI + CBT over SSRI only for the primary or secondary outcome measures at any time point. This lack of difference held when baseline and treatment characteristics where taken into account (age, sex, severity, co-morbid characteristics, quality and quantity of CBT treatment, number of clinic attendances). The SSRI + CBT group was somewhat more expensive over the 28 weeks than the SSRI-only group (p=0.057) and no more cost-effective. Over the trial period there was on average a decrease in suicidal thoughts and self-harm compared with levels recorded at baseline. There was no significant increase in disinhibition, irritability and violence compared with levels at baseline. Around 20% (n=40) of patients in the trial were non-responders. Of these, 17 (43%) showed no improvement by 28 weeks and 23 (57%) were considered minimally (n=10) or moderately to severely worse (n=13). CONCLUSIONS: For moderately to severely depressed adolescents who are non-responsive to a BII, the addition of CBT to fluoxetine plus routine clinical care does not improve outcome or confer protective effects against adverse events and is not cost-effective. SSRIs (mostly fluoxetine) are not likely to result in harmful adverse effects. The findings are broadly consistent with existing guidelines on the treatment of moderate to severe depression. Modification is advised for those presenting with moderate (6-8 symptoms) to severe depressions (>8 symptoms) and in those with either overt suicidal risk and/or high levels of personal impairment. In such cases, the time allowed for response to psychosocial interventions should be no more than 2-4 weeks, after which fluoxetine should be prescribed. Further research should focus on evaluating the efficacy of specific psychological treatments against brief psychological intervention, determining the characteristics of patients with severe depression who are non-responsive to fluoxetine, relapse prevention in severe depression and improving tools for determining treatment responders and non-responders.

Cost-effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and routine specialist care with and without cognitive behavioural therapy in adolescents with major depression.

BACKGROUND: Major depression is an important and costly problem among adolescents, yet evidence to support the provision of cost-effective treatments is lacking. AIMS: To assess the short-term cost-effectiveness of combined selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) together with clinical care compared with SSRIs and clinical care alone in adolescents with major depression. METHOD: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial in the UK. Outcomes and costs were assessed at baseline, 12 and 28 weeks. RESULTS: The trial comprised 208 adolescents, aged 11-17 years, with major or probable major depression who had not responded to a brief initial psychosocial intervention. There were no significant differences in outcome between the groups with and without CBT. Costs were higher in the group with CBT, although not significantly so (P=0.057). Cost-effectiveness analysis and exploration of the associated uncertainty suggest there is less than a 30% probability that CBT plus SSRIs is more cost-effective than SSRIs alone. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of CBT plus SSRIs is not more cost-effective in the short-term than SSRIs alone for treating adolescents with major depression in receipt of routine specialist clinical care.

The MacArthur Three-City Outcome Study: evaluating multi-informant measures of young children's symptomatology.

OBJECTIVE: Three sites collaborated to evaluate the reliability and validity of 2 measures, developed in tandem to assess symptomatology and impairment in 4- to 8-year-old children: the Berkeley Puppet Interview Symptomatology Scales (BPI-S) and the Health and Behavior Questionnaire (HBQ). METHOD: In this case-control study, mothers, teachers, and children reported on multiple dimensions of children's mental health for 120 children (67 community and 53 clinic-referred children). RESULTS: The BPI-S and the parent and teacher versions of the HBQ demonstrated strong test-retest reliability and discriminant validity on a majority of symptom scales. Medium to strong effect sizes (Cohen d) indicated that children in the clinic-referred group were viewed by all 3 informants as experiencing significantly higher levels of symptomatology than nonreferred, community children. CONCLUSION: The availability of a set of multi-informant instruments that are psychometrically sound, developed in tandem, and developmentally appropriate for young children will enhance researchers' ability to investigate and understand symptomatology or the emergence of symptomatology in middle childhood.