Measurement-Based Care in the Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Disruptive Behavior Disorders

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; also known as hyperkinetic disorder) is a common neurodevelopmental condition that affects children and adults worldwide. ADHD has a predominantly genetic aetiology that involves common and rare genetic variants. Some environmental correlates of the disorder have been discovered but causation has been difficult to establish. The heterogeneity of the condition is evident in the diverse presentation of symptoms and levels of impairment, the numerous co-occurring mental and physical conditions, the various domains of neurocognitive impairment, and extensive minor structural and functional brain differences. The diagnosis of ADHD is reliable and valid when evaluated with standard diagnostic criteria. Curative treatments for ADHD do not exist but evidence-based treatments substantially reduce symptoms and/or functional impairment. Medications are effective for core symptoms and are usually well tolerated. Some non-pharmacological treatments are valuable, especially for improving adaptive functioning. Clinical and neurobiological research is ongoing and could lead to the creation of personalized diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for this disorder.

10 Lessons Learned in Launching a Division-Wide Measurement-Based Care Initiative

Mental health problems are a major source of morbidity and mortality for children and adolescents, affecting 15% to 20% of those under 18 years of age in the US.1 Half of all mental health conditions start by age 14 years, although most cases remain undetected and untreated.2 Despite knowing much about mental health conditions affecting children, many speculate that the lack of standardized approaches to patient care contribute to poor outcomes, including substantial diagnostic variation, few remissions, risk for relapse or recidivism, and, ultimately, greater mortality due to an inability to accurately predict who will make a suicide attempt.3-5 Studies support this over-reliance on the "art of medicine" (ie, subjective judgment without use of standardized measures), finding that only 17.9% of psychiatrists and 11.1% of psychologists in the US routinely administer symptom rating scales to their patients, despite studies suggesting that when using clinical judgment alone, mental health providers detect deterioration for only 21.4% of patients.4.

A Paradigm for Targeting Functional Impairment as an Outcome in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Although functional impairment is required for a diagnosis in the DSM 5, the time frame and definition of functional impairment is ambiguous. We present a conceptual review clarifying the difference between functional impairment as a stable trait representing strength or disability in various domains, and functional impairment as secondary to emotional or behavior problems, which is a state sensitive to change with treatment intervention. Functional impairment as a measure of treatment outcome includes both change from baseline and status at the endpoint of treatment. When using a validated measure of function, functional improvement can be defined as the percentage of patients who achieve the Minimal Important Clinical Difference (MCID) and functional remission as the percentage of patients who normalize at treatment endpoint. True treatment remission should be defined as both symptomatic and functional remission.