The pharmacologic management of delirium in children and adolescents

Delirium is a serious and common problem in severely medically ill patients of all ages. It has been less addressed in children and adolescents. Treatment of delirium is predicated on addressing its underlying cause. The management of its symptoms depends on the off-label use of antipsychotics, while avoiding agents that precipitate or worsen delirium. Olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone are presently considered first-line drugs, usually replacing haloperidol. Other agents have shown promise, including melatonin to address the sleep disturbance characteristic of delirium, and dexmedetomidine, an α2-agonist, that may facilitate lower doses of benzodiazepines and opioids that may worsen delirium.

Adjustment disorders: the state of the art

Adjustment disorders are common, yet under-researched mental disorders. The present classifications fail to provide specific diagnostic criteria and relegate them to sub-syndromal status. They also fail to provide guidance on distinguishing them from normal adaptive reactions to stress or from recognized mental disorders such as depressive episode or post-traumatic stress disorder. These gaps run the risk of pathologizing normal emotional reactions to stressful events on the one hand and on the other of overdiagnosing depressive disorder with the consequent unnecessary prescription of antidepressant treatments. Few of the structured interview schedules used in epidemiological studies incorporate adjustment disorders. They are generally regarded as mild, notwithstanding their prominence as a diagnosis in those dying by suicide and their poor prognosis when diagnosed in adolescents. There are very few intervention studies.

Adjustment disorder: epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment

Adjustment disorder was introduced into the psychiatric classification systems almost 30 years ago, although the concept was recognized for many years before that. In DSM-IV, six subtypes are described based on the predominant symptoms, but no further diagnostic criteria are offered to assist the clinician. These are common conditions, especially in primary care and in consultation liaison psychiatry, where the prevalence ranges from 11% to 18% and from 10% to 35%, respectively. Yet they are under-researched, possibly due to the failure of some of the common diagnostic tools to allow for the diagnosis of adjustment disorder. Among the tools that incorporate adjustment disorder, the concordance between the clinical and interview diagnosis is very poor, with the diagnosis being made more commonly in clinical practice than the diagnostic tools allow for. Adjustment disorder is found in all cultures and in all age groups. The presence of a causal stressor is essential before a diagnosis of adjustment disorder can be made, while the symptoms vary and include those that are found in other common psychiatric disorders. It is also important to distinguish adjustment disorder from normal reactions to stressful events. Adjustment disorders are difficult to distinguish from normal responses to life's stressors, while the distinction from major depression also poses a classificatory conundrum since both are conceptually different. Adjustment disorder is a diagnosis based on the longitudinal course of symptoms in the context of a stressor, while a diagnosis of major depression is a cross-sectional one based on symptom numbers. Treatments consist mainly of brief interventions, while pharmacotherapy is limited to the symptomatic management of anxiety or insomnia. There are no robust studies demonstrating benefits from antidepressants. However, the number of studies of either type of intervention is very limited.

The adjustment disorders: the conundrums of the diagnoses

This article discusses the conundrums and the dilemmas of the conceptual framework of the diagnoses of the adjustment disorders (ADs). The psychiatric diagnoses that arise between normal behavior and the major psychiatric morbidities constitute the problematic subthreshold disorders. These subthreshold entities are also juxtaposed between problem-level diagnoses and more clearly defined major disorders. They present important taxonomic and diagnostic dilemmas in that they are often poorly defined, overlap with other diagnostic groupings, and have indefinite symptomatology. ADs were designed as a "wild card" to allow the coding of a psychiatric "diagnosis" for work done by psychiatrists and other mental health care specialists when the patient's symptoms do not reach the criterion of a major mental disorder. It is therefore not surprising that issues of reliability and validity prevail. The issues of diagnostic rigor and clinical utility seem at odds for the AD. Clinicians need a wild card, and field studies need to use reliable and valid concepts of AD and assessments instruments to determine more exact specification of the parameters of the diagnosis. Finally, appropriate and timely treatment is essential for patients with AD so that their symptoms do not worsen; their important relationships are not further impaired; or their capacity to work, study, or be active in their essential interpersonal pursuits is not compromised.