Adjuvant effects of vitamin A and vitamin D supplementation on treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a study protocol for a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicentric trial in China.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 7.2% of children in the world suffer from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Due to the availability of the osmotic-release oral-system methylphenidate, ADHD currently has a remission rate of up to 30.72%. Nevertheless, it has been reported that patients with ADHD tend to exhibit vitamin A and vitamin D deficiency, which may aggravate the symptoms of ADHD. This study aims to determine the effect of vitamin A and vitamin D supplementation as adjunctive therapy to methylphenidate on the symptoms of ADHD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a parallel, prospective, interventional multicentric study. Patients will be enrolled from the southern, central and northern parts of China. A target of 504 patients will be followed for 8 weeks. They will be allocated into three groups (vitamin AD, vitamin D and placebo) and administered the interventions accordingly. Data on changes in the symptoms of ADHD as well as changes in the serum concentrations of vitamin A and vitamin D will be recorded. Both responders and nonresponders based on the sociodemographic and clinical data will also be described to mitigate selection bias. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, China (approval number: (2019) IRB (STUDY) number 262). The results of the trial will be reported in peer-reviewed scientific journals and academic conferences regardless of the outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04284059.

Effects of Collaborative Care for Comorbid Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Among Children With Behavior Problems in Pediatric Primary Care.

This study evaluates the impact of a 6-month care management intervention for 206 children diagnosed with comorbid attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) from a sample of 321 five- to 12-year-old children recruited for treatment of behavior problems in 8 pediatric primary care offices. Practices were cluster-randomized to Doctor Office Collaboration Care (DOCC) or Enhanced Usual Care (EUC). Chart reviews documented higher rates of service delivery, prescription of medication for ADHD, and titration in DOCC (vs EUC). Based on complex conditional models, DOCC showed greater acute improvement in individualized ADHD treatment goals and follow-up improvements in quality of life and ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder goals. Medication use had a significant effect on acute and follow-up ADHD symptom reduction and quality of life. Medication continuity was associated with some long-term gains. A collaborative care intervention for behavior problems that incorporated treatment guidelines for ADHD in primary care was more effective than psychoeducation and facilitated referral to community treatment.

ADHD and Psychiatric Comorbidity: Functional Outcomes in a School-Based Sample of Children.

Objective: Investigate the prevalence and impact of psychiatric comorbidities in community-based samples of schoolchildren with/without ADHD. Method: Teachers and parents screened children in South Carolina (SC; n = 4,604) and Oklahoma (OK; n = 12,626) for ADHD. Parents of high-screen and selected low-screen children received diagnostic interviews (SC: n = 479; OK: n = 577). Results: Psychiatric disorders were increased among children with ADHD and were associated with low academic performance. Conduct disorder/oppositional defiant disorder (CD/ODD) were associated with grade retention (ODD/CD + ADHD: odds ratio [OR] = 3.0; confidence interval [CI] = [1.5, 5.9]; ODD/CD without ADHD: OR = 4.0; CI = [1.7, 9.7]). School discipline/police involvement was associated with ADHD alone (OR = 3.2; CI = [1.5, 6.8]), ADHD + CD/ODD (OR = 14.1, CI = [7.3, 27.1]), ADHD + anxiety/depression (OR = 4.8, CI = [1.6, 14.8]), and CD/ODD alone (OR = 2.8, CI = [1.2, 6.4]). Children with ADHD + anxiety/depression had tenfold risk for poor academic performance (OR = 10.8; CI = [2.4, 49.1]) compared to children with ADHD alone. This should be interpreted with caution due to the wide confidence interval. Conclusion: Most children with ADHD have psychiatric comorbidities, which worsens functional outcomes. The pattern of outcomes varies by type of comorbidity.

ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment Guidelines: A Historical Perspective.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common behavioral condition and the second most common chronic illness in children. The observance of specific behaviors in multiple settings have remained the most successful method for diagnosing the condition, and although there are differences in specific areas of the brain, and a high heritability estimate (∼76%), they are not diagnostically specific. Medications, and particularly stimulant medication, have undergone rigorous studies to document their efficacy dating back to the 1970s. Likewise, behavioral interventions in the form of parent training and classroom programs have demonstrated robust efficacy during the same time period. Both medication and behavioral interventions are symptomatic treatments. The availability of only symptomatic treatments places ADHD in the same category as other chronic conditions such as diabetes and asthma. Successful treatment of most individuals requires ongoing adherence to the therapy. Improved communication between patients and their families, primary and mental health providers, and school personnel is necessary for effective ADHD treatment. Further enhancement of electronic systems to facilitate family, school, and provider communication can improve monitoring of ADHD symptoms and functional performance. The American Academy of Pediatrics ADHD guidelines were initially developed to help primary care clinicians address the needs of their patients with ADHD and were further refined with the second revision in 2019.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is 1 of the most common neurobehavioral disorders of childhood and can profoundly affect children's academic achievement, well-being, and social interactions. The American Academy of Pediatrics first published clinical recommendations for evaluation and diagnosis of pediatric ADHD in 2000; recommendations for treatment followed in 2001. The guidelines were revised in 2011 and published with an accompanying process of care algorithm (PoCA) providing discrete and manageable steps by which clinicians could fulfill the clinical guideline's recommendations. Since the release of the 2011 guideline, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has been revised to the fifth edition, and new ADHD-related research has been published. These publications do not support dramatic changes to the previous recommendations. Therefore, only incremental updates have been made in this guideline revision, including the addition of a key action statement related to diagnosis and treatment of comorbid conditions in children and adolescents with ADHD. The accompanying process of care algorithm has also been updated to assist in implementing the guideline recommendations. Throughout the process of revising the guideline and algorithm, numerous systemic barriers were identified that restrict and/or hamper pediatric clinicians' ability to adopt their recommendations. Therefore, the subcommittee created a companion article (available in the Supplemental Information) on systemic barriers to the care of children and adolescents with ADHD, which identifies the major systemic-level barriers and presents recommendations to address those barriers; in this article, we support the recommendations of the clinical practice guideline and accompanying process of care algorithm.

The Association Between Race/Ethnicity and Socioeconomic Factors and the Diagnosis and Treatment of Children with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Assessing race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) relationships with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) diagnosis, treatment, and access to care has yielded inconsistent results often based only on parent-report. In contrast, this study used broader ADHD diagnostic determination including case-definition to examine these relationships in a multisite elementary-school-based sample. METHOD: Secondary analysis of children with and without ADHD per parent and teacher-reported Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) criteria evaluated SES, race/ethnicity, and other variables through simple bivariate/multivariable models within and across: parent-reported diagnosis, medication treatment, and meeting ADHD study case-definition. RESULTS: The total sample included 51.9% male, 51.3% White, and 53.1% with private insurance; 10% had parent-reported ADHD diagnoses while 8.3% met ADHD study case-definition. In multivariable models, White children had higher odds of parent-reported diagnoses than Black, Hispanic, and Other Race/Ethnicity children (p < 0.05), but only Hispanic children had lower odds of being case-positive (<0.05); males and children in single-parent households had higher odds of parent-reported diagnoses and being case-positive (p < 0.05); and children who were White, male, and had health insurance had higher odds of taking medication (p < 0.05). Among children who were case-positive, those with Medicaid, White, and 2-parent statuses had higher odds of parent-reported diagnoses (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Children with underlying ADHD appear more likely to have assessment/medication treatment access if they are White, male, have health insurance (particularly Medicaid), and live in 2-parent households. While boys and children raised by single parents may have higher rates of ADHD diagnoses, false-positive diagnostic risk also appeared higher, inviting further investigation.

Common Use of Stimulants and Alpha-2 Agonists to Treat Preschool Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A DBPNet Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of stimulants and alpha-2 agonists (A2As) for the treatment of preschool-aged children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) at 2 Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrics Research Network sites. METHODS: Demographic information, diagnoses, and medications prescribed by developmental-behavioral pediatricians (DBPs) were extracted from the electronic health record for all outpatient visits from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011. The subset of visits for children aged 2 to 5 years who had a diagnosis of ADHD was included in this analysis. Multivariable models were constructed to identify factors associated with prescribing stimulants and A2As. RESULTS: Over the 2-year period, 984 children with a diagnosis of ADHD were seen at 1779 visits. Of the 984 children, 342 (34.8%) were prescribed a stimulant, and 243 (24.7%) were prescribed an A2A. Both medications were prescribed at the same visit at least once during the 2-year period for 97 children (9.9%). Alpha-2 agonists were prescribed more often at site 2 than site 1 (OR [odds ratio] = 1.62, p = 0.015). Stimulants were more likely to be prescribed for older preschool-aged children (OR = 1.66, p < 0.001), and A2As were more likely to be prescribed for younger children (OR = 0.82, p = 0.02). Both stimulants and A2As were more likely to be prescribed to children with ADHD and comorbid conditions. CONCLUSION: Alpha-2 agonists are commonly used by some DBPs for preschool ADHD. Variation in the use of A2As across sites may indicate a lack of consensus on when to use these medications and suggests a need for comparative effectiveness research to better define the relative benefits and side effects of A2As and stimulants for the treatment of preschool ADHD.

The Relationship Between Pediatric Residents' Experiences Being Parented and Their Provision of Parenting Advice.

Background: Factors surrounding pediatricians' parenting advice and training on parenting during residency have not been well studied. The Resident Parenting Questionnaire (RPQ) was developed to assess (a) the relationship between pediatric residents' upbringing and their parenting advice style and (b) factors associated with confidence and resource use when delivering parenting advice. Methods: Three hundred and one pediatric residents from 15 United States residency programs completed the RPQ with upbringing and advice responses categorized using Baumrind's parenting model (authoritative, authoritarian, permissive). Chi-square/Fisher's exact tests, Bowker's test of symmetry, and regression analyses assessed associations between residents' upbringing, parenting advice style/content, and confidence in providing parenting advice. Results: Most participants indicated being raised authoritatively (68%) and giving authoritative parenting advice (83%), but advice differed based on how they perceived their upbringing (p < 0.001). Residents noting authoritative upbringing were more likely to give authoritative advice (85%) while others tended to give advice differing from upbringing (e.g., those perceiving authoritarian upbringing were more likely to give authoritative/permissive). Analyses suggest resident race, acculturation, future plans, and resident level are associated with parenting advice type. Confidence in giving parenting advice decreased significantly as patient age increased and increased with resident level advancement. Residents reported consulting attending physicians for parenting advice guidance more than any other evidence-based resources. Conclusion: Most pediatric residents appear to be aware of appropriate authoritative parenting advice regardless of upbringing, especially as they advance through residency. Residents may benefit from opportunities to reflect upon their upbringing, particularly if raised in authoritarian or permissive styles. Targeted training of residents on evidence-based parenting strategies, particularly for older pediatric patients, appears warranted.

Accuracy of a Pediatric Behavioral Health Screener to Detect Untreated Behavioral Health Problems in Primary Care Settings.

An estimated 10% to 20% of youth in primary care exhibit behavioral symptoms and may go underdetected. Most screeners identify risk base of symptoms alone, irrespective of functional impairment. To address this issue, the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17), a widely used symptom screener, was combined with functional impairment and current behavioral services enrollment items to form the Pediatric Behavioral Health Screen (PBHS) and assessed compared to the full Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). A total of 267 youth between 6 and 16 years of age were administered the screener and the CBCL. Areas under the receiver operating curves approached or exceeded 0.90 in all analyses, reflecting excellent classification accuracy. Almost no false negatives were observed among currently untreated cases with functional impairment. No differential item functioning was found. Performance of the PSC-17 as a pediatric primary care behavioral health screener supported previous research, and additional functional impairment items to form the PBHS appeared useful, particularly for interpreting borderline range scores.

Vital Signs: National and State-Specific Patterns of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment Among Insured Children Aged 2-5 Years - United States, 2008-2014.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with adverse outcomes and elevated societal costs. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) 2011 guidelines recommend "behavior therapy" over medication as first-line treatment for children aged 4-5 years with ADHD; these recommendations are consistent with current guidelines from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry for younger children. CDC analyzed claims data to assess national and state-level ADHD treatment patterns among young children. METHODS: CDC compared Medicaid and employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) claims for "psychological services" (the procedure code category that includes behavior therapy) and ADHD medication among children aged 2-5 years receiving clinical care for ADHD, using the MarketScan commercial database (2008-2014) and Medicaid (2008-2011) data. Among children with ESI, ADHD indicators were compared during periods preceding and following the 2011 AAP guidelines. RESULTS: In both Medicaid and ESI populations, the percentage of children aged 2-5 years receiving clinical care for ADHD increased over time; however, during 2008-2011, the percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries receiving clinical care was double that of ESI beneficiaries. Although state percentages varied, overall nationally no more than 55% of children with ADHD received psychological services annually, regardless of insurance type, whereas approximately three fourths received medication. Among children with ESI, the percentage receiving psychological services following release of the guidelines decreased significantly by 5%, from 44% in 2011 to 42% in 2014; the change in medication treatment rates (77% in 2011 compared with 76% in 2014) was not significant. CONCLUSIONS AND COMMENTS: Among insured children aged 2-5 years receiving clinical care for ADHD, medication treatment was more common than receipt of recommended first-line treatment with psychological services. Among children with ADHD who had ESI, receipt of psychological services did not increase after release of the 2011 guidelines. Scaling up evidence-based behavior therapy might lead to increased delivery of effective ADHD management without the side effects of ADHD medications.

Treatment of Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder among Children with Special Health Care Needs.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the parent-reported prevalence of treatments for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among a national sample of children with special health care needs (CSHCN), and assess the alignment of ADHD treatment with current American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines. STUDY DESIGN: Parent-reported data from the 2009-2010 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs allowed for weighted national and state-based prevalence estimates of medication, behavioral therapy, and dietary supplement use for ADHD treatment among CSHCN aged 4-17 years with current ADHD. National estimates were compared across demographic groups, ADHD severity, and comorbidities. Medication treatment by drug class was described. RESULTS: Of CSHCN with current ADHD, 74.0% had received medication treatment in the past week, 44.0% had received behavioral therapy in the past year, and 10.2% used dietary supplements for ADHD in the past year. Overall, 87.3% had received past week medication treatment or past year behavioral therapy (both, 30.7%; neither, 12.7%). Among preschool-aged CSHCN with ADHD, 25.4% received medication treatment alone, 31.9% received behavioral therapy alone, 21.2% received both treatments, and 21.4% received neither treatment. Central nervous system stimulants were the most common medication class (84.8%) among CSHCN with ADHD, followed by the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor atomoxetine (8.4%). CONCLUSION: These estimates provide a benchmark of clinical practice for the period directly preceding issuance of the American Academy of Pediatrics' 2011 ADHD guidelines. Most children with ADHD received medication treatment or behavioral therapy; just under one-third received both. Multimodal treatment was most common for CSHCN with severe ADHD and those with comorbidities. Approximately one-half of preschoolers received behavioral therapy, the recommended first-line treatment for this age group.

The impact of case definition on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder prevalence estimates in community-based samples of school-aged children.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of varying attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnostic criteria, including new DSM-5 criteria, on prevalence estimates. METHOD: Parent and teacher reports identified high- and low-screen children with ADHD from elementary schools in 2 states that produced a diverse overall sample. The parent interview stage included the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-IV (DISC-IV), and up to 4 additional follow-up interviews. Weighted prevalence estimates, accounting for complex sampling, quantified the impact of varying ADHD criteria using baseline and the final follow-up interview data. RESULTS: At baseline 1,060 caregivers were interviewed; 656 had at least 1 follow-up interview. Teachers and parents reported 6 or more ADHD symptoms for 20.5% (95% CI = 18.1%-23.2%) and 29.8% (CI = 24.5%-35.6%) of children respectively, with criteria for impairment and onset by age 7 years (DSM-IV) reducing these proportions to 16.3% (CI = 14.7%-18.0%) and 17.5% (CI = 13.3%-22.8%); requiring at least 4 teacher-reported symptoms reduced the parent-reported prevalence to 8.9% (CI = 7.4%-10.6%). Revising age of onset to 12 years per DSM-5 increased the 8.9% estimate to 11.3% (CI = 9.5%-13.3%), with a similar increase seen at follow-up: 8.2% with age 7 onset (CI = 5.9%-11.2%) versus 13.0% (CI = 7.6%-21.4%) with onset by age 12. Reducing the number of symptoms required for those aged 17 and older increased the overall estimate to 13.1% (CI = 7.7%-21.5%). CONCLUSION: These findings quantify the impact on prevalence estimates of varying case definition criteria for ADHD. Further research of impairment ratings and data from multiple informants is required to better inform clinicians conducting diagnostic assessments. DSM-5 changes in age of onset and number of symptoms required for older adolescents appear to increase prevalence estimates, although the full impact is uncertain due to the age of our sample.

Considerations and evidence for an ADHD outcome measure.

OBJECTIVE: The 2011 American Academy of Pediatrics attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) guideline emphasizes monitoring and measuring outcomes of children diagnosed with ADHD; however, recommendations for how to measure improvement are less clear. A long-term goal was to develop an outcome measure that assesses the quality of care for children with ADHD. As a first step in that process, we conducted a literature synthesis on the efficacy and effectiveness of guideline-recommended ADHD treatments on patient outcomes. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed according to PRISMA protocol and using MeSH terms. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria were used to assess the level of evidence. Studies of interest were published after 2002 and assessed prospective ADHD improvement using recommended ADHD treatments. RESULTS: The systematic review resulted in 35 studies. According to USPSTF criteria, included studies were level I (n = 24), level II-1 (n = 1), and level II-2 (n = 10) and were rated as good (n = 20) or fair (n = 15). DSM-criteria-based rating scales were used most frequently to measure ADHD treatment outcomes. All included treatments resulted in ADHD improvement. Regardless of outcome measure, tool, or treatment type, symptom reduction and improvement were relatively large, with mean percentage reductions ranging from 20% to 86% on ADHD-Behavior Rating Scales scales, with only 1 study with <25% reduction. Effect sizes ranged from 0.15 to 4.57. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this literature review, a consistent pattern of improvement in pediatric ADHD patients' core symptoms emerged across studies, study designs, and recommended treatment approaches. This evidence supports the notion that an improvement of core symptoms within 1 year could satisfy the requirements of an effective outcome measure, which should be further investigated.

Pediatric behavioral health screening in primary care: a preliminary analysis of the pediatric symptom checklist-17 with functional impairment items.

BACKGROUND: Roughly 21% of youth in the United States meet criteria for a mental health diagnosis, but only one-fifth of those children obtain help. The Pediatric Behavioral Health Screen (PBHS) utilizes the Pediatric Symptom Checklist-17 (PSC-17) and functional impairment items to assess behavioral health concerns. METHODS: Data were obtained from a systematic chart review for children 6 to 16 years old. Descriptive analyses and a confirmatory factor analysis were used to evaluate the clinical performance and utility of the PBHS. RESULTS: A positive screen was endorsed for 26.7% of the sample, of whom 68% also experienced functional impairment. Clinicians appropriately administered the screen 73.5% of the time. The 3-factor model of the PSC-17 exhibited a good model fit. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence rates of psychosocial concerns and functional impairment affirm the need for routine behavioral health screening in the pediatric primary care setting. The PBHS exhibited good psychometric performance and clinical utility.

The prevalence of ADHD: its diagnosis and treatment in four school districts across two states.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the epidemiology of ADHD in communities using a DSM-IVTR case definition. METHOD: This community-based study used multiple informants to develop and apply a DSM -IVTR-based case definition of ADHD to screening and diagnostic interview data collected for children 5-13 years of age. Teachers screened 10,427 children (66.4%) in four school districts across two states (SC and OK). ADHD ratings by teachers and parent reports of diagnosis and medication treatment were used to stratify children into high and low risk for ADHD. Parents (n = 855) of high risk and gender frequency-matched low risk children completed structured diagnostic interviews. The case definition was applied to generate community prevalence estimates, weighted to reflect the complex sampling design. RESULTS: ADHD prevalence was 8.7% in SC and 10.6% in OK. The prevalence of ADHD medication use was 10.1% (SC) and 7.4% (OK). Of those medicated, 39.5% (SC) and 28.3% (OK) met the case definition. Comparison children taking medication had higher mean symptom counts than other comparison children. CONCLUSIONS: Our ADHD estimates are at the upper end of those from previous studies. The identification of a large proportion of comparison children taking ADHD medication suggests that our estimates may be conservative; these children were not included as cases in the case definition, although some might be effectively treated.

The impact of a Medical Home for children with developmental disability within a pediatric resident continuity clinic. .

Primary care provided in a Medical Home (MH) can improve outcomes for Children with Special Health Care Needs. It is important for residents to experience MH in their training. The Oklahoma Family Support 360 project, a five-year collaborative initiative, established a MH in a pediatric primary care resident continuity clinic at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center. A study of the effects of enhancement of the seven key MH attributes showed a significant decrease in Emergency Service use, a significant increase in Dental Service use, high satisfaction with MH activities, and high ratings for a positive impact on quality of life for the child and family. The project demonstrated that a MH could be established in a pediatric academic program, improved health service use, and had a high level of satisfaction from participating families. This model provides a good example of the MH qualities for residents in training.