Short but normal

Short Stature: Is It a Psychosocial Problem and Does Changing Height Matter?

Some proponents of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) treatment in growth hormone-sufficient children cite height, as an isolated physical characteristic, as being associated with psychosocial morbidity. Others question the reliability of the evidence underpinning the quality-of-life rationale for treatment as well as the bioethics of rhGH treatment. The following questions are addressed: (1) Is short stature an obstacle to positive psychosocial adjustment? and (2) Does increasing height with rhGH treatment make a difference to the person's psychosocial adaptation and quality of life? Three clinical case examples are used to illustrate the complexities associated with decision-making surrounding rhGH use.

Growth Hormone Treatment of Short Stature: Status of the Quality of Life Rationale

The unlimited availability of biosynthetic human growth hormone (rhGH) has contributed to the disassociation of the treatment of short stature from its causes. The rationale for treatment has traditionally rested upon the assumption that short stature, in the extreme, may constitute a physical disability, and otherwise represents a significant psychosocial burden for the individual. This review summarizes what is known about the psychosocial aspects of short stature and the quality of life benefits of rhGH treatment. Stereotypes and assumptions about short stature are evaluated in light of empirical findings. Problems of psychosocial adjustment are relatively common in the general population. Because of the salience of short stature, and its potential to serve as a lightning rod to divert attention from other factors interfering with a healthy psychological adaptation, the clinician must be watchful of misattributions for ongoing problems, or unrealistic predictions of the benefits of taller stature. For these reasons, the clinician should consider incorporating a psychosocial component in the diagnostic evaluation to broaden potential treatment recommendations. Finally, studies of factors influencing family decisions regarding factors for and against rhGH therapy provide important clues to how clinicians might enhance the informed consent process.

The psychosocial consequences of short stature: a review of the evidence

The advent of biosynthetic growth hormone (GH) has been accompanied by a transformation in the clinical management of youths with short stature. An important--if not always explicitly stated--goal of endocrine therapies is an improvement in the psychological adaptation of individuals with short stature. Negative stereotypes regarding short stature constitute a potential source of psychosocial stress for the affected child and, in turn, the entire family. Nevertheless, studies have demonstrated that the psychological adaptation of individuals who are shorter than average is largely indistinguishable from others, whether in childhood, adolescence or adulthood. "Short stature" as an isolated physical characteristic appears to hold little value as a predictor of the individual's psychological adaptation or quality of life. In order to avoid the unwarranted medicalizing of healthy short stature, clinicians would be well advised to incorporate factors beyond auxology in the decision-making algorithm when selecting and preparing patients for possible growth-promoting therapies.

Short normal stature and psychosocial disadvantage: a critical review of the evidence

Physicians and parents alike are under increasing pressure to identify and to treat short stature, but intervention implies the presence of some pathology, physical or psychological, that can be corrected. Where there is true GH deficiency, the argument for replacement is uncontroversial. It is less compelling where GH 'insufficiency' is diagnosed. In the case of the short, but otherwise normal, child the indications for therapy are even less clear. Short stature, per se, is clearly not a disease, in spite of the perception by some practitioners that the rate of growth of such children is abnormal. Short stature is, however, commonly perceived to be associated with social and psychological disadvantage, yet many of these misperceptions about short stature can be challenged. A critical review of the literature pertaining to the psychosocial correlates of short stature uncovers much flawed evidence. Most importantly, the belief, widely held by paediatricians, that short children are likely to be significantly disadvantaged, has been founded largely on data from clinic-referred samples. In such studies, children with real (or perceived) behavioural or academic problems are likely to be overly represented. Publications arising from such studies, however, inevitably lead to an increase in the demand for treatment both from and for those who previously had no such concern. In contrast, data from a well controlled, prospective population-based study suggest the essential normality of the short normal child. Parents and children alike should be reassured by these findings. In the absence of clear pathology, physical or psychological, GH therapy for short but otherwise normal children must therefore, in most cases, be deemed cosmetic, raising issues as to the ethics of so-called "plastic endocrinology".