Patterns of psychiatric comorbidity, cognition, and psychosocial functioning in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Although attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a common disorder of childhood, its status as a disorder in adults is not clear. The authors reasoned that if the adult diagnosis of the disorder is a valid clinical entity, it should be similar to the childhood disorder with regard to patterns of psychiatric and cognitive findings. METHODS: Eighty-four adults with a clinical diagnosis of childhood-onset attention deficit hyperactivity disorder confirmed by structured interview who were referred for treatment were studied. Findings were compared with those from a preexisting study group of referred children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, nonreferred adult relatives of those children who also had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and adults without the disorder who were relatives of normal children. Subjects were evaluated with a comprehensive battery of psychiatric, cognitive, and psychosocial assessments. RESULTS: The referred and nonreferred adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder were similar to one another but more disturbed and impaired than the comparison subjects without the disorder. The pattern of psychopathology, cognition, and functioning among the adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder approximated the findings for children with the disorder. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that referred and nonreferred adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder have a pattern of demographic, psychosocial, psychiatric, and cognitive features that mirrors well-documented findings among children with the disorder. These findings further support the validity of the diagnosis for adults.

Convergence of the Child Behavior Checklist with structured interview-based psychiatric diagnoses of ADHD children with and without comorbidity.

We evaluated the convergence of CBCL scales with the diagnosis of ADHD and comorbid disorders in 133 ADHD and 118 normal control boys, aged 6-17 years old. We evaluated the strength of association between each CBCL scale and structured-interview derived diagnoses with Total Predictive Value (TPV) and the odds-ratio (OR). Excellent convergence was found between the CBCL Attention Problems scale with the diagnosis of ADHD, between the Delinquent Behavior scale and the diagnosis of CD, and between the Anxiety/Depression scale and the diagnoses of Anxiety Disorders. These findings indicate that the CBCL could serve as a rapid and useful screening instrument to identify comorbid and non-comorbid cases of ADHD.

Are perinatal complications relevant to the manifestation of ADD? Issues of comorbidity and familiality.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the role of pregnancy, delivery, and infancy complications (PDICs) in the etiology of attention deficit disorder (ADD) addressing issues of comorbidity and familiarity by formulating and testing multiple hypotheses. METHOD: Subjects were six to 17-year-old boys with DSM-III attention deficit disorder (ADD, N = 73), psychiatric (N = 26), and normal (N = 26) controls and their relatives. Information on PDICs was obtained from the mothers in a standardized manner blind to the proband's clinical status. RESULTS: Using odds ratio analyses, an association was found between ADD and PDICs that was strongest for the comorbid and nonfamilial subtypes. In contrast, noncomorbid and familial ADD subgroups differed less from normal controls in the risk for PDICs. CONCLUSIONS: The increased risk for PDICs in nonfamilial ADD children and the lack of evidence for increased risk among familial ADD patients suggests that PDICs may be part of nongenetic etiologic mechanisms in this disorder, especially for children who have comorbid disorders.

Evidence for the independent familial transmission of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disabilities: results from a family genetic study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to clarify the relationship between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disabilities. METHOD: The authors assessed learning disabilities in a sample of 140 children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and in 120 normal comparison children. They also assessed a sample of the probands' 822 first-degree relatives. RESULTS: The risk for learning disabilities was highest among relatives of probands with both attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disabilities. The two disorders did not cosegregate in families. There was nonrandom mating between spouses with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disabilities. CONCLUSIONS: The two disorders are transmitted independently in families, and their co-occurrence may be due to nonrandom mating. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is likely to be etiologically independent from learning disabilities.

Comorbidity between ADDH and learning disability: a review and report in a clinically referred sample.

A widely variable overlap ranging from 10 to 92% has been reported in the literature between attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity (ADDH) and learning disability (LD), most likely a result of inconsistencies in the criteria used to define LD in different studies. The following study seeks to more accurately determine rates of LD in clinically referred children. Using a psychometrically reliable methodological approach, it was expected that the rate of LD in ADDH children would be far more modest than previously reported. Subjects were referred children with ADDH (N = 60), children with academic problems (N = 30), and normal controls (N = 36) of both sexes with available psychological and achievement testing. Using a liberal definition of LD, significant differences were found between the groups (ADDH = 38% versus academic problems = 43% versus normals = 8%; p = 0.002). In contrast, more modest rates were found using two more stringent methods of assessment (23 and 17%; 10 and 3%; 2 and 0%, respectively; p = 0.02). Arithmetic-based LD appears to be equally identified by both stringent methods, whereas the liberal definition overidentified children in all three groups. These findings show that a liberal definition of LD overidentifies LD not only in ADDH children but also in normal children.