Controversies concerning the diagnosis and treatment of bipolar disorder in children

A Systematic Review of Misdiagnosis of Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: Assessments and Recommendations

Bipolar disorders (BP) are a class of psychiatric disorders with a complex symptom presentation. This systematic review aims to summarize literature pertaining to the misdiagnosis of pediatric BP using the DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria, while emphasizing the negative impact that untreated BP has on life outcomes. This paper also attempts to outline and summarize available recommendations which may aid in improving diagnostic accuracy of pediatric BP. Scholars Portal Journals, PsychINFO, and MEDLINE databases were used to search articles until March 21, 2023. Inclusion criteria limited this review to articles published between 1995 and 2022 using a pediatric (age < 18) sample. Exclusion criteria omitted articles containing samples with self-reported diagnoses. A total of 15 articles are included in this review; study results were synthesized using a narrative summary. Youth with BP are most frequently misdiagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), schizophrenia, and major depressive disorder (MDD). Misdiagnosis can lead to inappropriate intervention plans and a delay in proper treatment, negatively impacting a child's quality of life by contributing to social, occupational, and economic adversity. Finally, this review addresses the need for future quantitative research on the implications of false negative diagnoses of pediatric BP.

Barriers to timely identification of bipolar disorder in youth: a multidimensional perspective

Bipolar disorder (BD) in youth often goes unrecognized and therefore untreated. However, little is known about pathways to treatment of youth with BD and factors that influence the time taken for each stage of these pathways. In this article, we use the conceptual framework by Scott and colleagues called the Model of Pathways to Treatment as a foundation to explore the components of delay in the diagnosis and treatment of youth with BD. The total time from the onset of symptoms until treatment initiation was divided into four sequential intervals; i.e., the Appraisal, the Help-seeking, the Diagnostic and the Pre-treatment intervals and potential disease, patient, and healthcare system/provider factors that influence each interval were identified. This multidimensional conceptual framework can offer a systematic approach to understanding and exploring barriers to early identification and interventions in BD, which is a crucial step in the development of strategies to facilitate prompt diagnosis and treatment. We hope this work contributes to the discussion on delayed diagnosis and treatment of youth with BD and provides a roadmap to inform future research studies and policy decisions.

The DADYS-Screen: Development and Evaluation of a Screening Tool for Affective Dysregulation in Children

Affective dysregulation (AD) in children is characterized by persistent irritability and severe temper outbursts. This study developed and evaluated a screening questionnaire for AD in children. The development included the generation of an initial item pool from existing instruments, a Delphi rating of experts, focus groups with experts and parents, and psychometric analyses of clinical and population-based samples. Based on data of a large community-based study, the final screening questionnaire was developed (n = 771; 49.7 % female; age M = 10.02 years; SD = 1.34) and evaluated (n = 8,974; 48.7 % female; age M = 10.00 years; SD = 1.38) with methods from classical test theory and item response theory. The developed DADYS-Screen (Diagnostic Tool for Affective Dysregulation in Children-Screening Questionnaire) includes 12 items with good psychometric properties and scale characteristics including a good fit to a one-factorial model in comparison to the baseline model, although only a "mediocre" fit according to the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Results could be confirmed using a second and larger data set. Overall, the DADYS-Screen is able to identify children with AD, although it needs further investigation using clinical data.

Irritability in developmental age: A narrative review of a dimension crossing paediatric psychopathology

OBJECTIVE

Irritability is an important theme in paediatric psychiatry considering its high frequency in developmental age, its association with negative outcomes and consequently significant public health impact. Present as main or associated feature of several psychiatric diagnoses, irritability represents a challenge for clinicians who try to understand its origin and role in developmental psychopathology. In this review we try to: (1) get an overview of this dimension and its relationship with each of the main neuropsychiatric disorders in paediatric population and (2) provide a summary of currently available instruments to assess irritability in children and adolescents.

METHOD

In this narrative review, an overview of irritability in children and adolescents is proposed focusing on selected literature.

RESULTS

Irritability as feature of many paediatric psychiatric conditions has been evaluated by many authors and included in classifications of paediatric psychiatric diseases. Framework of irritability evolved over time and dimension of irritability has been investigated using different tools and methodologies, both qualitative and quantitative. Metrics of irritability as clinical dimension are important in the diagnostic process of paediatric diseases.

CONCLUSION

Investigating the presence of irritability in all children with related disorders is mandatory if we consider the risk for functional impairment and affective and behavioural disorders associated with high levels of irritability. Using rigid threshold in developmental age to differentiate physiological from pathological irritability could lead many children having subthreshold levels of irritability to receive no diagnosis and, consequently, no treatment where instead a dimensional approach to irritability could allow to identify prodromal phase and prevent the evolution towards clinical pathological expressions.

Is the 4-factor model of symptomology equivalent across bipolar disorder subtypes?

Background

Research with the BDS_x (Bipolar Disorder Symptom Scale) suggests a 4-factor structure of responses: two depression (cognitive, somatic) and two hypo/mania factors (elation/loss of insight, affrontive symptoms). The two depression and two hypo/mania factors are correlated; and affrontive symptoms of hypo/mania (e.g., furious, disgusted, argumentative) are positively correlated with both depression factors suggesting pathways for mixed symptom presentation. This grouping of affrontive symptoms of hypo/mania organically emerged in exploratory research and has subsequently been supported in confirmatory analyses between samples and over time. The BDS_x has been clinically validated with BD outpatients.

Results

Over 19 days, we recruited an international sample of 784 adults with BD using micro-targeted, social media advertising (M  =  44.48 years, range 18–82). All participants indicated that they had BD (subtype, if known) and had been diagnosed with BD (month, year). This sample size was sufficient to confirm the 4-factor model across subtypes and compare the three (BD I, BD II, BD NOS). Responses to 19 of 20 BDS_x items were psychometrically consistent across BD subtypes. Only responses to the ‘hopeless’ item were significantly higher for those with BD II.

Conclusions

When comparing models, it appears that affrontive symptoms are significantly and uniformly associated with hypo/mania and both depression factors across subtypes. In contrast to BD diagnostic criteria, this suggests that affrontive symptoms are central to the clinical presentation of hypo/mania and mixed symptomology across BD subtypes.

Navigating the diagnostic challenges of bipolar disorder in youth

ABSTRACT

Bipolar disorder in youth is difficult to diagnose and treat, but early detection is important to mitigate risks and improve patient outcomes. This article evaluates the unique challenges of diagnosing and treating bipolar disorder in children and adolescents. Bipolar disorder is associated with a significant personal and societal health burden and frequently is misdiagnosed and incorrectly treated. More research is needed to understand the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder and which treatment options are best throughout the lifespan.

Focus on Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder: A review of the literature

The inclusion of the Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), under the category of depressive disorders, provides a diagnosis for those children and adolescents with severe persistent irritability and temper outbursts, once misdiagnosed as Bipolar Disorders. The main and constantly present features of DMDD are chronic, non-episodic and persistent irritability, and temper tantrums disproportionate with the trigger. DMDD is characterized by high rates of comorbidity with other psychiatric disorders. Its main clinical manifestations overlap with Oppositional Defiant Disorder, Conduct Disorder, and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. For this diagnostic overlap and the increasing use of pharmacological treatments in children and adolescents, the inclusion of DMDD diagnosis has been subjected to many criticisms. Since it is a new diagnostic entity, literature on DMDD prevalence, epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment guidelines, is still sparse and unclear. The aim of this review is to collect and analyze the literature on DMDD diagnostic criteria and main hallmarks, with particular attention to comorbidities and treatment options.

The geography of a controversial diagnosis: A bibliographic analysis of published academic perspectives on 'paediatric bipolar disorder'

BACKGROUND

The hypothesis that bipolar disorder presents before puberty with atypical mania has proved to be controversial. Published academic perspectives on the validity of Paediatric Bipolar Disorder (PBD) appear to vary between the United States and the rest of the world.

METHODS

We examined the perspectives of articles citing four seminal articles. The citing articles were grouped as either supportive or non-supportive of the PBD hypothesis, and the perspectives of the articles by US authors were compared with those by non-US authors.

RESULTS

There were 787 citing articles commenting on PBD, mostly published in US-based journals. Most authors were affiliated with several US institutions. Among the 624 articles with US authorship, the majority (83%) supported PBD. Of the 163 articles by non-US authors, most (60%) supported the traditional view that bipolar disorders are rare before mid-adolescence. Published academic perspectives in favour of the PBD hypothesis are mostly concentrated in several US institutions.

CONCLUSION

There is majority support for PBD among citing articles from the United States, whereas the traditional perspective predominates in articles from most other countries.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders Task Force report on pediatric bipolar disorder: Knowledge to date and directions for future research

OBJECTIVES

Over the past two decades, there has been tremendous growth in research regarding bipolar disorder (BD) among children and adolescents (ie, pediatric BD [PBD]). The primary purpose of this article is to distill the extant literature, dispel myths or exaggerated assertions in the field, and disseminate clinically relevant findings.

METHODS

An international group of experts completed a selective review of the literature, emphasizing areas of consensus, identifying limitations and gaps in the literature, and highlighting future directions to mitigate these gaps.

RESULTS

Substantial, and increasingly international, research has accumulated regarding the phenomenology, differential diagnosis, course, treatment, and neurobiology of PBD. Prior division around the role of irritability and of screening tools in diagnosis has largely abated. Gold-standard pharmacologic trials inform treatment of manic/mixed episodes, whereas fewer data address bipolar depression and maintenance/continuation treatment. Adjunctive psychosocial treatment provides a forum for psychoeducation and targets primarily depressive symptoms. Numerous neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies, and increasing peripheral biomarker studies, largely converge with prior findings from adults with BD.

CONCLUSIONS

As data have accumulated and controversy has dissipated, the field has moved past existential questions about PBD toward defining and pursuing pressing clinical and scientific priorities that remain. The overall body of evidence supports the position that perceptions about marked international (US vs elsewhere) and developmental (pediatric vs adult) differences have been overstated, although additional research on these topics is warranted. Traction toward improved outcomes will be supported by continued emphasis on pathophysiology and novel therapeutics.

Atypical antipsychotics for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane Review, last published in 2012 (Loy 2012). Children and youths with disruptive behaviour disorders may present to health services, where they may be treated with atypical antipsychotics. There is increasing usage of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of disruptive behaviour disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect and safety of atypical antipsychotics, compared to placebo, for treating disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths. The aim was to evaluate each drug separately rather than the class effect, on the grounds that each atypical antipsychotic has different pharmacologic binding profile (Stahl 2013) and that this is clinically more useful.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of atypical antipsychotics versus placebo in children and youths aged up to and including 18 years, with a diagnosis of disruptive behaviour disorders, including comorbid ADHD. The primary outcomes were aggression, conduct problems and adverse events (i.e. weight gain/changes and metabolic parameters). The secondary outcomes were general functioning, noncompliance, other adverse events, social functioning, family functioning, parent satisfaction and school functioning.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors (JL and KS) independently collected, evaluated and extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analyses for each of our primary outcomes, except for metabolic parameters, due to inadequate outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (spanning 2000 to 2014), involving a total of 896 children and youths aged five to 18 years. Bar two trials, all came from an outpatient setting. Eight trials assessed risperidone, one assessed quetiapine and one assessed ziprasidone. Nine trials assessed acute efficacy (over four to 10 weeks); one of which combined treatment with stimulant medication and parent training. One trial was a six-month maintenance trial assessing symptom recurrence.The quality of the evidence ranged from low to moderate. Nine studies had some degree of pharmaceutical support/funding. Primary outcomesUsing the mean difference (MD), we combined data from three studies (238 participants) in a meta-analysis of aggression, as assessed using the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC) ‒ Irritability subscale. We found that youths treated with risperidone show reduced aggression compared to youths treated with placebo (MD -6.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.79 to -4.19; low-quality evidence). Using the standardised mean difference (SMD), we pooled data from two risperidone trials (190 participants), which used different scales: the Overt Aggression Scale ‒ Modified (OAS-M) Scale and the Antisocial Behaviour Scale (ABS); as the ABS had two subscales that could not be combined (reactive and proactive aggression), we performed two separate analyses. When we combined the ABS Reactive subscale and the OAS-M, the SMD was -1.30 in favour of risperidone (95% CI -2.21 to -0.40, moderate-quality evidence). When we combined the ABS Proactive subscale and OAS-M, the SMD was -1.12 (95% CI -2.30 to 0.06, moderate-quality evidence), suggesting uncertainty about the estimate of effect, as the confidence intervals overlapped the null value. In summary, there was some evidence that aggression could be reduced by risperidone. Data were lacking on other atypical antipsychotics, like quetiapine and ziprasidone, with regard to their effects on aggression.We pooled data from two risperidone trials (225 participants) in a meta-analysis of conduct problems, as assessed using the Nisonger Child Behaviour Rating Form ‒ Conduct Problem subscale (NCBRF-CP). This yielded a final mean score that was 8.61 points lower in the risperidone group compared to the placebo group (95% CI -11.49 to -5.74; moderate-quality evidence).We investigated the effect on weight by performing two meta-analyses. We wanted to distinguish between the effects of antipsychotic medication only and the combined effect with stimulants, since the latter can have a counteracting effect on weight gain due to appetite suppression. Pooling two trials with risperidone only (138 participants), we found that participants on risperidone gained 2.37 kilograms (kg) more (95% CI 0.26 to 4.49; moderate-quality evidence) than those on placebo. When we added a trial where all participants received a combination of risperidone and stimulants, we found that those on the combined treatment gained 2.14 kg more (95% CI 1.04 to 3.23; 3 studies; 305 participants; low-quality evidence) than those on placebo. Secondary outcomesOut of the 10 included trials, three examined general functioning, social functioning and parent satisfaction. No trials examined family or school functioning. Data on non-compliance/attrition rate and other adverse events were available from all 10 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that in the short term risperidone may reduce aggression and conduct problems in children and youths with disruptive behaviour disorders There is also evidence that this intervention is associated with significant weight gain.For aggression, the difference in scores of 6.49 points on the ABC ‒ Irritability subscale (range 0 to 45) may be clinically significant. It is challenging to interpret the clinical significance of the differential findings on two different ABS subscales as it may be difficult to distinguish between reactive and proactive aggression in clinical practice. For conduct problems, the difference in scores of 8.61 points on the NCBRF-CP (range 0 to 48) is likely to be clinically significant. Weight gain remains a concern.Caution is required in interpreting the results due to the limitations of current evidence and the small number of high-quality trials. There is a lack of evidence to support the use of quetiapine, ziprasidone or any other atypical antipsychotic for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths and no evidence for children under five years of age. It is uncertain to what degree the efficacy found in clinical trials will translate into real-life clinical practice. Given the effectiveness of parent-training interventions in the management of these disorders, and the somewhat equivocal evidence on the efficacy of medication, it is important not to use medication alone. This is consistent with current clinical guidelines.

Ethical considerations in preventive interventions for bipolar disorder

AIM

Early intervention and prevention of serious mental disorders such as bipolar disorder has the promise of decreasing the burden associated with these disorders. With increasing early and preventive intervention efforts among cohorts such as those with a familial risk for bipolar disorder, there is a need to examine the associated ethical concerns. The aim of this review was to examine the ethical issues underpinning the clinical research on pre-onset identification and preventive interventions for bipolar disorder.

METHODS

We undertook a PubMed search updated to November 2014 incorporating search terms such as bipolar, mania, hypomania, ethic*(truncated), early intervention, prevention, genetic and family.

RESULTS

Fifty-six articles that were identified by this method as well as other relevant articles were examined within a framework of ethical principles including beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice. The primary risks associated with research and clinical interventions include stigma and labelling, especially among familial high-risk youth. Side effects from interventions are another concern. The benefits of preventive or early interventions were in the amelioration of symptoms as well as the possibility of minimizing disability, cognitive impairment and progression of the illness. Supporting the autonomy of individuals and improving access to stigma-free care may help moderate the potential challenges associated with the risks of interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Concerns about the risks of early identification and pre-onset interventions should be balanced against the potential benefits, the individuals' right to choice and by improving availability of services that balance such dilemmas.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective transition from major depression to bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

Some people with major depressive disorder (MDD) may be at a pre-onset stage for bipolar disorder (BD), where early identification or prevention efforts may be feasible. We aimed to identify rates and characteristics predictive of transition to BD in prospective follow-up studies of people with MDD.

METHODS

Using a systematic search strategy, we identified studies with a diagnostic ascertainment of MDD and BD of an adequate standard, and where the minimum length of follow-up was 6 months. We examined the incidence and point prevalence of BD and the pooled odds ratios (OR) for baseline predictors.

RESULTS

From 5554 unique publications, 56 were included. Nearly a quarter of adults (22.5%) and adolescents with MDD followed up for a mean length of 12-18 years developed BD, with the greatest risk of transition being in the first 5 years. The meta-analysis identified that transition from MDD to BD was predicted by family history of BD (OR = 2.89, 95% CI: 2.01-4.14, N = 7), earlier age of onset of depression (g = -0.33, SE = 0.05, N = 6) and presence of psychotic symptoms (OR = 4.76, 95% CI: 1.79-12.66, N = 5).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants with the identified risk factors merit closer observation and may benefit from prevention efforts, especially if outcomes broader than BD are considered.

Pediatric Bipolar Disorder

The diagnosis of bipolar disorder (BD) in youth is confusing and controversial. Controversy notwithstanding, youth diagnosed with BD have high behavioral health needs and are at elevated risk for problematic long-term psychosocial functioning and complex psychiatric medication regimens. Pediatricians and other primary care providers (PCPs) can play an important role in the assessment and treatment of youth diagnosed with BD and the recently created and also controversial diagnosis of disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD). This article provides information on the definitions, background, and presentation of pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD), how to differentiate PBD from other psychiatric disorders, effective psychiatric and psychosocial interventions for PBD, potential roles for PCPs, and what is known about DMDD. [Pediatr Ann. 2016;45(10):e362-e366.].

The Effectiveness and Tolerability of Central Nervous System Stimulants in School-Age Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder Across Home and School

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the effectiveness and tolerability of stimulants in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD).

METHODS

To be eligible, participants had to meet Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV) criteria for the combined subtype of ADHD and National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) severe mood dysregulation criteria. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (DSM-V) DMDD criteria were retrospectively assessed after the study was completed. An open-label medication trial lasting up to 6 weeks was completed to optimize the central nervous system (CNS) stimulant dose. Measures of affective symptoms, ADHD symptoms and other disruptive behaviors, impairment, and structured side effect ratings were collected before and after the medication trial.

RESULTS

Optimization of stimulant medication was associated with a significant decline in depressive symptoms on the Childhood Depression Rating Score-Revised Scale (p<0.05, Cohen's d=0.61) and Mood Severity Index score (p<0.05, Cohen's d=0.55), but not in manic-like symptoms on the Young Mania Rating Scale. There was a significant reduction in ADHD (p<0.05, Cohen's d=0.95), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) (p<0.05, Cohen's d=0.5), and conduct disorder (CD) symptoms (p<0.05, Cohen's d=0.65) as rated by parents. There was also a significant reduction in teacher-rated ADHD (p<0.05, Cohen's d=0.33) but not in ODD symptoms. Medications were well tolerated and there was no increase in side effect ratings seen with dose optimization. Significant improvement in functioning was reported by clinicians and parents (all p's<0.05), but youth still manifested appreciable impairment at end-point.

CONCLUSIONS

CNS simulants were well tolerated by children with ADHD comorbid with a diagnosis of DMDD. CNS stimulants were associated with clinically significant reductions in externalizing symptoms, along with smaller improvements in mood. However, most participants still exhibited significant impairment, suggesting that additional treatments may be needed to optimize functioning.

Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder in a Community Mental Health Clinic: Prevalence, Comorbidity and Correlates

OBJECTIVE

The revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (DSM-5) added a new diagnosis of disruptive mood dysregulation disorder (DMDD) to depressive disorders. This study examines the prevalence, comorbidity, and correlates of the new disorder, with a particular focus on its overlap with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), with which DMDD shares core symptoms.

METHODS

Data were obtained from 597 youth 6-18 years of age who participated in a systematic assessment of symptoms offered to all intakes at a community mental health center (sample accrued from July 2003 to March 2008). Assessment included diagnostic, symptomatic, and functional measures. DMDD was diagnosed using a post-hoc definition from item-level ratings on the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children that closely matches the DSM-5 definition. Caregivers rated youth on the Child Behavior Checklist.

RESULTS

Approximately 31% of youth met the operational definition of DMDD, and 40% had Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) diagnoses of ODD. Youth with DMDD almost always had ODD (odds ratio [OR] = 53.84) and displayed higher rates of comorbidity with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and conduct disorder than youth without DMDD. Caregivers of youth with DMDD reported more symptoms of aggressive behavior, rule-breaking, social problems, anxiety/depression, attention problems, and thought problems than all other youth without DMDD. Compared with youth with ODD, youth with DMDD were not significantly different in terms of categorical or dimensional approaches to comorbidity and impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

The new diagnosis of DMDD might be common in community mental health clinics. Youth with DMDD displayed more severe symptoms and poorer functioning than youth without DMDD. However, DMDD almost entirely overlaps with ODD and youth with DMDD were not significantly different than youth with ODD. These findings raise concerns about the potentially confusing effects of using DMDD in clinical settings, particularly given that DSM-5 groups DMDD with depressive disorders, but ODD remains a disruptive behavior disorder, potentially changing the decision-making framework that clinicians use to select treatments.

Psychiatric disorders in adolescents and young adults with Down syndrome and other intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND

Relative to other aspects of Down syndrome, remarkably little is known about the psychiatric problems experienced by youth and young adults with this syndrome and if these problems differ from others with intellectual disabilities. Yet adolescence and young adulthood are particularly vulnerable time periods, as they involve multiple life transitions in educational, medical, and other service systems.

METHODS

This study compared the psychiatric diagnoses of 49 adolescent and young adult patients with Down syndrome to 70 patients with other intellectual disabilities (IDs). The groups were similar in age, gender, and level of intellectual impairment. The 119 participants, aged 13 to 29 years (M = 21) were evaluated in one of two specialized psychiatric clinics.

RESULTS

In contrast to previous literature, those with Down syndrome versus other IDs had significantly higher rates of psychosis NOS or depression with psychotic features (43% versus 13%). Unlike the ID group, psychosis was predominantly seen in females with Down syndrome. Marked motoric slowing in performing routine daily activities or in expressive language was manifested in 17% of patients with Down syndrome. No group differences were found in anxiety or depressive disorders, and the ID group had significantly higher rates of bipolar and impulse control disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary observations warrant further studies on genetic, neurological, and psychosocial factors that place some young people with Down syndrome or other IDs at high risk for severe psychiatric illness.

Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: Subtype Trend and Impact of Behavioral Comorbidities

The diagnosis of pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD) has increased dramatically in community-treated youth in the past 20 years. No previous study has assessed the trend in PBD subtype diagnoses or the impact of clinician-reported behavioral comorbidities (BC) on psychotropic medication prescribing patterns. This study aims: (1) to characterize national trends in PBD visits in relation to PBD subtypes; and (2) to assess differences in socio-demographic PBD subtype diagnostic patterns and psychotropic medications prescribed in PBD visits with and without behavioral comorbidities (w/w/o BC). PBD visits for 1999–2010 from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) data were assessed using population-weighted chi-square and logistic regression analyses. While PBD visit rates were stable across 12 years, the proportional shift of subtype diagnosis from Bipolar I (89.0%) in 1999–2002 to Bipolar Not Otherwise Specified (NOS) (74.1%) in 2007–2010 was notable. Compared with PBD without behavioral comorbidities (w/o BC), PBD visits w/BC had greater proportions of the bipolar-NOS subtype, more males, 2–14-year-olds, and more publicly-insured visits. The prescription of antipsychotics (60% vs. 61%) was common in PBD visits regardless of the presence of behavioral comorbidities. Stimulants were the predominant class prescribed for PBD visits with BC (67.8% vs. 9.4%). Antidepressants were significantly greater in PBD visits without BC (41.6% vs. 21.0%). Overall one-third of PBD youth visits were prescribed antipsychotics concomitant with other psychotropic classes. Behavioral conditions accompanying PBD visits were prominent, suggesting the need for monitoring and evaluating the outcomes of complex medication regimens in community populations.

Diagnostic profiles and clinical characteristics of youth referred to a pediatric mood disorders clinic

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the diagnostic profiles and clinical characteristics of youth (ages 6-18 years) referred for diagnostic evaluation to a pediatric mood disorders clinic that specializes in early-onset bipolar disorder.

METHOD

A total of 250 youth were prescreened in an initial telephone intake, and 73 participated in a full diagnostic evaluation. Trained psychologists administered the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADSPL) to the child and to at least one parent, and a child psychiatrist conducted a separate pharmacological evaluation. Evaluators then met with a larger clinical team for a consensus diagnosticconference.

RESULTS

Based on consensus diagnoses, 13 of the 73 referred youth (18%) met lifetime DSM-IV-TR criteria for a bipolar spectrum disorder (BSD; bipolar I, II or not otherwise specified disorder, or cyclothymic disorder). Of these 73, 27 (37%) were referred with a community diagnosis of a bipolar spectrum disorder, but only 7 of these 27 (26%) met DSM-IV-TR criteria for a bipolar spectrum diagnosis based on a structured interview and consensus diagnoses. The most common Axis I diagnoses (based on structured interview/consensus) were attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (31/73, 42.5%) and major depressive disorder (23/73, 32%).

CONCLUSIONS

When youth referred for evaluation of BSD are diagnosed using standardized interviews with multiple reporters and consensus conferences, the "true positive" rate for bipolar spectrum diagnoses is relatively low. Reasons for the discrepancy between community and research-based diagnoses of pediatric BSD- including the tendency to stretch the BSD criteria to include children with depressive episodes and only 1-2 manic symptoms-are discussed.

DSM-IV diagnosis in depressed primary care patients with previous psychiatric ICD-10 bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

In the past 20 years, much evidence has accumulated against the overly restrictive diagnostic concepts of hypomania in DSM-IV and DSM-IV-TR. We tested DSM-IV-TR and a broader modified version (DSM-IV-TRm) for their ability to detect bipolarity in patients who had been treated for bipolar disorders (BD) in psychiatric settings, and who now consulted general practitioners (GPs) for new major depressive episodes (MDE).

METHODS

Bipolact II was an observational, single-visit survey involving 390 adult patients attending primary care for MDE (DSM-IV-TR criteria) in 201 GP offices in France. The participating GPs (53.3 ± 6.5 years old, 80.1% male) were trained by the Bipolact Educational Program, and were familiar with the medical care of depressive patients.

RESULTS

Of the 390 patients with MDE, 129 (33.1%) were previously known as bipolar patients (ICD-10 criteria). Most of the latter bipolar patients (89.7%) had previously been treated with antidepressants. Only 9.3% of them met DMS-IV-TR criteria for BD. Conversely, 79.1% of the 129 bipolar patients met DMS-IV-TRm criteria for BD and showed strong associations with impulse control disorders and manic/hypomanic switches during antidepressant treatment.

LIMITATIONS

Limited training of participating GPs, recall bias of patients, and the study not being representative for untreated bipolar patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few ICD-10 bipolar patients consulting French GPs for MDE met DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar diagnosis, which suggests that DSM-IV-TR criteria are insufficient and too restrictive for the diagnosis of BD. DSM-IV-TRm was more sensitive, but 20% of bipolar patients were undetected.

First Manic Episode in an 11 Year-old Girl

OBJECTIVE

We present the case of an 11 year-old girl admitted to the Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke for a first manic episode.

METHOD

Differential diagnoses of adjustment disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder were considered but eliminated.

RESULTS

No organic etiology was detected. Her condition rapidly remitted with aripiprazole 3mg. After her discharge, she suffered a relapse due to instability of her living conditions and was rehospitalized.

CONCLUSION

Mania is a difficult diagnosis in youths due to its nonspecific symptoms, rare prepubertal occurrence, and diagnostic complexity. Despite ongoing research, there is little conclusive information on the impact of psychosocial stressors on the evolution of early-onset bipolar disorder.

Frontostriatal neuroimaging findings differ in patients with bipolar disorder who have or do not have ADHD comorbidity

BACKGROUND

The inferior frontal cortical (IFC)-striatal network plays an integral role in response inhibition and is compromised in patients with Bipolar Disorder (BP) or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Prior BP functional neuroimaging studies have not accounted for ADHD comorbidity despite its high prevalence.

METHODS

The authors conducted an fMRI study using a response inhibition task (Go-NoGo) in 32 euthymic adults with BP, half with comorbid ADHD (BP/ADHD); 16 adults with ADHD alone; and 30 healthy controls. Within- and between-group whole-brain analyses were performed to assess for significant neural function differences.

RESULTS

All groups activated frontal and striatal regions involved in response inhibition. ANOVA results demonstrated significant interaction effects of BP and ADHD in the anterior and posterior cingulate, left superior and middle frontal gyri and left inferior parietal lobule. Follow-up comparisons showed significant differences between BP subjects with and without ADHD. Other regions demonstrated main effects of BP (left inferior frontal gyrus, left middle frontal gyrus, right superior frontal gyrus and left insula) and ADHD (left inferior frontal gyrus, left precentral gyrus and right anterior cingulate).

LIMITATIONS

This study, as the first of its kind, requires replication using large sample sizes and controlling for potential effects of medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Euthymic bipolar adults with comorbid ADHD have significantly different neural activation patterns from BP patients without this comorbidity. If understanding of the neurobiology of bipolar disorder is to be achieved, it is critical to control for this potential confound, something not done by most prior fMRI studies of adults with BP.

Atypical antipsychotics for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths

BACKGROUND

Disruptive behaviour disorders include conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder and disruptive behaviour not otherwise specified. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is frequently associated with disruptive behaviour disorders. The difficulties associated with disruptive behaviour disorders are demonstrated through aggression and severe behavioural problems. These often result in presentation to psychiatric services and may be treated with medications such as atypical antipsychotics. There is increasing evidence of a significant rise in the use of atypical antipsychotics for treating disruptive behaviour disorders in child and adolescent populations.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect and safety of atypical antipsychotics, compared to placebo, for treating disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths. 

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases in August 2011: CENTRAL (2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1948 to August Week 1), EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 32), PsycINFO (1806 to August Week 2 2011), CINAHL (1937 to current), ClinicalTrials.gov (searched 15 August 2011), Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (searched 15 August 2011), CenterWatch (searched 15 August 2011) and ICTRP (searched 15 August 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with children and youths up to and including the age of 18, in any setting, with a diagnosis of a disruptive behaviour disorder. We included trials where participants had a comorbid diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, major depression or an anxiety disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies and disagreements were resolved by discussion. Two review authors extracted data independently. One review author entered data into Review Manager software and another checked it. We contacted trial authors for information about adverse effects and to provide missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight randomised controlled trials, spanning 2000 to 2008. Seven assessed risperidone and one assessed quetiapine. Three of the studies were multicentre. Seven trials assessed acute efficacy and one assessed time to symptom recurrence over a six-month maintenance period.We performed meta-analyses for the primary outcomes of aggression, conduct problems and weight changes but these were limited by the available data as different trials reported either mean change scores (average difference) or final/post-intervention raw scores and used different outcome measures. We also evaluated each individual trial's treatment effect size where possible, using Hedges' g.For aggression, we conducted two meta-analyses. The first included three trials (combined n = 238) using mean difference (MD) on the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC) Irritability subscale. Results yielded a final mean score with treatment that was 6.49 points lower than the post-intervention mean score with placebo (95% confidence interval (CI) -8.79 to -4.19). The second meta-analysis on aggression included two trials (combined n = 57) that employed two different outcome measures (Overt Aggression Scale (modified) (OAS-M) and OAS, respectively) and thus we used a standardised mean difference. Results yielded an effect estimate of -0.18 (95% CI -0.70 to 0.34), which was statistically non-significant.We also performed two meta-analyses for conduct problems. The first included two trials (combined n = 225), both of which employed the Nisonger Child Behaviour Rating Form - Conduct Problem subscale (NCBRF-CP). The results yielded a final mean score with treatment that was 8.61 points lower than that with placebo (95% CI -11.49 to -5.74). The second meta-analysis on conduct problems included two trials (combined n = 36), which used the Conners' Parent Rating Scale - Conduct Problem subscale (CPRS-CP). Results yielded a mean score with treatment of 12.67 lower than with placebo (95% CI -37.45 to 12.11), which was a statistically non-significant result.With respect to the side effect of weight gain, a meta-analysis of two studies (combined n = 138) showed that participants on risperidone gained on average 2.37 kilograms more than those in the placebo group over the treatment period (MD 2.37; 95% CI 0.26 to 4.49).For individual trials, there was a range of effect sizes (ranging from small to large) for risperidone reducing aggression and conduct problems. The precision of the estimate of the effect size varied between trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some limited evidence of efficacy of risperidone reducing aggression and conduct problems in children aged 5 to 18 with disruptive behaviour disorders in the short term.For aggression, the difference in scores of 6.49 points on the ABC Irritability subscale (range 0 to 45) may be clinically significant. For conduct problems, the difference in scores of 8.61 points on the NCBRF-CP (range 0 to 48) is likely to be clinically significant.Caution is required due to the limitations of the evidence and the small number of relevant high-quality studies. The findings from the one study assessing impact in the longer term suggest that the effects are maintained to some extent (small effect size) for up to six months. Inadequately powered studies produced non-significant results. The evidence is restricted by heterogeneity of the population (including below average and borderline IQ), and methodological issues in some studies, such as use of enriched designs and risk of selection bias. No study addressed the issue of pre-existing/concurrent psychosocial interventions, and comorbid stimulant medication and its dosage was only partially addressed. There is currently no evidence to support the use of quetiapine for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and adolescents.It is uncertain to what degree the efficacy found in clinical trials will translate into real life clinical practice. Participants in the studies were recruited from clinical services but those who agree to take part in the clinical trials are a subset of the overall population presenting for care. There are no research data for children under five years of age. Further high-quality research is required with large samples of clinically representative youths and long-term follow-up to replicate current findings.

Pediatric bipolar disorder in an era of "mindless psychiatry"

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD) reflects shifts in conceptualizing bipolar disorder among children and adolescents since the mid-1990s. Since then, PBD diagnoses, predominantly in the United States, have increased dramatically, and the diagnosis has attracted significant controversy. During the same period, psychiatric theory and practice has become increasingly biological. The aim of this paper is to examine the rise of PBD in terms of wider systemic influences.

METHOD

In the context of literature referring to paradigm shifts in psychiatry, we reviewed the psychiatric literature, media cases, and information made available by investigative committees and journalists.

RESULTS

Social historians and prominent psychiatrists describe a paradigm shift in psychiatry over recent decades: from an era of "brainless psychiatry," when an emphasis on psychodynamic and family factors predominated to the exclusion of biological factors, to a current era of "mindless psychiatry" that emphasizes neurobiological explanations for emotional and behavioral problems with limited regard for contextual meaning. Associated with this has been a tendency within psychiatry and society to neglect trauma and attachment insecurity as etiological factors; the "atheoretical" (but by default biomedical) premise of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd and 4th eds.); the influence of the pharmaceutical industry in research, continuing medical education, and direct-to-consumer advertising; and inequality in the U.S. health system that favors "diagnostic upcoding." Harm from overmedicating children is now a cause of public concern.

CONCLUSION

It can be argued that PBD as a widespread diagnosis, particularly in the United States, reflects multiple factors associated with a paradigm shift within psychiatry rather than recognition of a previously overlooked common disorder.

Do we really know how to treat a child with bipolar disorder or one with severe mood dysregulation? Is there a magic bullet?

Background. Despite controversy, bipolar disorder (BD) is being increasingly diagnosed in under 18s. There is scant information regarding its treatment and uncertainty regarding the status of "severe mood dysregulation (SMD)" and how it overlaps with BD. This article collates available research on treatment of BD in under 18s and explores the status of SMD. Methods. Literature on treatment of BD in under 18s and on SMD were identified using major search engines; these were then collated and reviewed. Results. Some markers have been proposed to differentiate BD from disruptive behaviour disorders (DBD) in children. Pharmacotherapy restricted to short-term trials of mood-stabilizers and atypical-antipsychotics show mixed results. Data on maintenance treatment and non-pharmacological interventions are scant. It is unclear whether SMD is an independent disorder or an early manifestation of another disorder. Conclusions. Valproate, lithium, risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole and quetiapine remain first line treatments for acute episodes in the under 18s with BD. Their efficacy in maintenance treatment remains unclear. There is no validated treatment for SMD. It is likely that some children who are currently diagnosed with BD and DBD and possibly most children currently diagnosed with SMD will be subsumed under the proposed category in the DSM V of disruptive mood dysregulation disorder with dysphoria.

Broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder: benefits vs. risks

There is considerable debate over whether bipolar and related disorders that share common signs and symptoms, but are currently defined as distinct clinical entities in DSM-IV and ICD-10, may be better characterized as falling within a more broadly defined "bipolar spectrum". With a spectrum view in mind, the possibility of broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder has been proposed. This paper discusses some of the rationale for an expanded diagnostic scheme from both clinical and research perspectives in light of potential drawbacks. The ultimate goal of broadening the diagnosis of bipolar disorder is to help identify a common etiopathogenesis for these conditions to better guide treatment. To help achieve this goal, bipolar researchers have increasingly expanded their patient populations to identify objective biological or endophenotypic markers that transcend phenomenological observation. Although this approach has and will likely continue to produce beneficial results, the upcoming DSM-IV and ICD-10 revisions will place increasing scrutiny on psychiatry's diagnostic classification systems and pressure to re-evaluate our conceptions of bipolar disorder. However, until research findings can provide consistent and converging evidence as to the validity of a broader diagnostic conception, clinical expansion to a dimensional bipolar spectrum should be considered with caution.

Treatment of Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: A Review

AIM: To review the diagnosis and the pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions for pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD). METHODS: A comprehensive literature review of studies discussing the diagnosis and treatment of PBD was conducted. RESULTS: A context for understanding controversies and difficulties in the diagnosis of PBD is provided. An evidence-based assessment protocol for PBD is reviewed. The evidence for the following three categories of pharmacologic interventions are reviewed: Lithium, antiepileptics, and second generation antipsychotics. Algorithms for medication decisions are briefly reviewed. Existing psychosocial treatments and the evidence for those treatments are also reviewed. CONCLUSION: Despite recent developments in understanding the phenomenology of PBD and in identifying pharmacologic and psychosocial interventions, critical gaps remain.

Lifetime psychopathology among the offspring of Bipolar I parents

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated high rates of psychopathology in the offspring of parents with bipolar disorder. The aim of this study was to identify psychiatric diagnoses in a sample of children of bipolar parents.

METHOD

This case series comprised 35 children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years, with a mean age of 12.5 ± 2.9 years (20 males and 15 females), who had at least one parent with bipolar disorder type I. The subjects were assessed using the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children - Present and Lifetime version (K-SADS-PL). Family psychiatric history and demographics were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the offspring studied, 71.4% had a lifetime diagnosis of at least one psychiatric disorder (28.6% with a mood disorder, 40% with a disruptive behavior disorder and 20% with an anxiety disorder). Pure mood disorders (11.4%) occurred less frequently than mood disorders comorbid with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (17.1%). Psychopathology was commonly reported in second-degree relatives of the offspring of parents with bipolar disorder (71.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support previous findings of an increased risk for developing psychopathology, predominantly mood and disruptive disorders, in the offspring of bipolar individuals. Prospective studies with larger samples are needed to confirm and expand these results.

The Use of Antiepileptic Drugs (AEDs) for the Treatment of Pediatric Aggression and Mood Disorders

Aggressive symptomatology presents across multiple psychiatric, developmental, neurological and behavioral disorders, complicating the diagnosis and treatment of the underlying pathology. Anti-Epileptic Drugs (AEDs) have become an appealing alternative in the treatment of aggression, mood lability and impulsivity in adult and pediatric populations, although few controlled trials have explored their efficacy in treating pediatric populations. This review of the literature synthesizes the available data on ten AEDs - valproate, carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, phenytoin, lamotrigine, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide, gabapentin and tiagabine - in an attempt to assess evidence for the efficacy of AEDs in the treatment of aggression in pediatric populations. Our review revealed modest evidence that some of the AEDs produced improvement in pediatric aggression, but controlled trials in pediatric bipolar disorder have not been promising. Valproate is the best supported AED for aggression and should be considered as a first line of treatment. When monotherapy is insufficient, combining an AED with either lithium or an atypical anti-psychotic can result in better efficacy. Additionally, our review indicates that medications with predominately GABA-ergic mechanisms of action are not effective in treating aggression, and medications which decrease glutaminergic transmission tended to have more cognitive adverse effects. Agents with multiple mechanisms of action may be more effective.