Psychopathological rating scales for diagnostic use in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

The diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults is a complex procedure which should include retrospective assessment of childhood ADHD symptoms either by patient recall or third party information, diagnostic criteria according to DSM-IV, current adult ADHD psychopathology including symptom severity and pervasiveness, functional impairment, quality of life and comorbidity. In order to obtain a systematic database for the diagnosis and evaluation of the course ADHD rating scales can be very useful. This article reviews rating instruments that have found general acceptance. The Wender-Utah Rating Scale (WURS) and the Childhood Symptoms Scale by Barkley and Murphy try to make a retrospective assessment of childhood ADHD symptoms. The Connors Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS), the Current Symptoms Scales by Barkley and Murphy (CSS), the Adult Self Report Scale (ASRS) by Adler et al. and Kessler et al. or the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder--Self Report Scale (ADHD-SR by R?sler et al.) are self report rating scales focusing mainly on the DSM-IV criteria. The CAARS and the CSS have other report forms too. The Brown ADD Rating Scale (Brown ADD-RS) and the Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder--Other Report Scale (ADHD-OR by R?sler et al.) are instruments for use by clinicians or significant others. Both self rating scales and observer report scales quantify the ADHD symptoms by use of a Likert scale mostly ranging from 0 to 3. This makes the instruments useful to follow the course of the disease quantitatively. Comprehensive diagnostic interviews not only evaluate diagnostic criteria, but also assess different psychopathological syndrome scores, functional disability measures, indices of pervasiveness and information about comorbid disorders. The most comprehensive procedures are the Brown ADD Diagnostic Form and the Adult Interview (AI) by Barkley and Murphy. An instrument of particular interest is the Wender Reimherr Interview (WRI) which follows a diagnostic algorithm different from DSM-IV. The interview contains only items delineated from adult psychopathology and not derived from symptoms originally designed for use in children. Other instruments focus on functional impairment, quality of life, comorbid disorders, gender effects and specific psychopathological models.     

Clinical assessment and diagnosis of adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent disorder in adult psychiatry, particularly in out-patient settings. There are no objective, laboratory-based tests that can establish this diagnosis. Present diagnostic criteria for ADHD are formulated primarily according to behavior in childhood, based on age inappropriate and impairing levels of hyperactivity, impulsivity and inattention. Other symptoms, such as mood instability and frustration intolerance, are not included in current criteria for ADHD, but are very prevalent in this patient group. ADHD is often comorbid with alcohol and substance abuse and other psychiatric disorders, in particular anxiety and personality disorders. Thus, the diagnostic assessment should both include a comprehensive clinical interview, rating scales for past and present symptoms and collateral information from multiple informants, as well as assessment of a broader spectrum of psychiatric and somatic conditions. As ADHD is associated with changes in brain function mediating different aspects of neuropsychological functions, assessment of those functions is important to understand the symptom patterns and to develop targeted treatment programs. Some topics for further research and for future developments of diagnostic criteria and tools are highlighted.     

Diagnostic controversies in adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE: While it is increasingly recognized that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) persists into adulthood, there is no consensus on diagnostic criteria for adult ADHD. In this article the authors describe and contrast competing approaches for diagnosis of adult ADHD used in clinical and research practice. METHOD: The authors review the Wender Utah criteria, DSM criteria, and laboratory assessment strategies for adult ADHD. Advantages and disadvantages of each approach are described, and recommendations are made as a basis for clinical assessment and future research. RESULTS: Both the Wender Utah criteria and DSM-based approaches identify significantly impaired ADHD adults with neurocognitive, biological, and treatment response patterns similar to pediatric ADHD patients. The Wender Utah criteria established the need for retrospective childhood diagnosis and recognize developmental differences in adult symptom expression. The Wender Utah criteria fail to identify patients with predominantly inattentive symptoms, exclude some patients with significant comorbid psychopathology, and diverge significantly from the DSM conception of ADHD. The DSM criteria have never been validated in adults, do not include developmentally appropriate symptoms and thresholds for adults, and fail to identify some significantly impaired adults who are likely to benefit from treatment. There are insufficient scientific data to justify use of laboratory assessment measures, including neuropsychological tests and brain imaging, in diagnosing adult ADHD. CONCLUSIONS: Adult ADHD remains a clinical diagnosis. Clinicians should be flexible in application of the current ADHD criteria to adults. Additional research is required to validate adult diagnostic criteria.     

Clinical presentations of adult patients with ADHD

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) persists into adulthood in an increasingly recognized number of individuals with childhood onset. The symptoms of adult ADHD are similar to the restlessness, distractibility, and impulsivity central to childhood ADHD, but expression of symptoms changes as the individual matures. A childhood history of ADHD is requisite for a diagnosis of adult ADHD, although full DSM-IV criteria for the childhood disorder need not be met as long as significant symptoms and impairment occurred. Three case reports described here illustrate the migration of symptoms and the use of retrospective reporting and rating scales to determine a diagnosis of adult ADHD. These reports also stress the high probability of comorbid disorders and family aggregation of ADHD, as well as the likelihood that the adult with ADHD has developed coping mechanisms to compensate for his or her impairment.     

ADHD symptoms and subtypes: relationship between childhood and adolescent symptoms

OBJECTIVE: To study attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and DSM-IV subtypes in childhood and adolescence. METHOD: A total of 457 adolescents ages 16 to 18 years from the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1986 participated in an epidemiological survey for ADHD. After assessment with a diagnostic interview those with current or childhood ADHD were classified using DSM-IV criteria. Childhood diagnosis of ADHD was set according to retrospective recall. The characteristics and relationships in ADHD symptomatology in childhood and adolescence were studied in relation to behavioral problems and parental history of attentional problems. RESULTS: ADHD was reported more commonly in childhood than in adolescence and variations in subtype classification occurred. Those with childhood and adolescent diagnosis had endorsed specific inattentive symptoms more commonly, had greater comorbid major depression and/or oppositional defiant disorder, and had fathers with more reported attentional problems than those with only childhood diagnosis. In childhood, ADHD subtypes differed along symptom severity, but by adolescence these differences were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: The persistence of ADHD from childhood to adolescence may be common. Specific inattentive symptoms, certain psychiatric comorbidity, and family history of attention problems (fathers specifically) contribute to the risk of persistent ADHD. ADHD subtype differences reflect symptom severity differences in childhood that are negligible by adolescence.     

Reformulating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder according to signal detection theory

OBJECTIVE: The current diagnostic algorithm for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is not highly predictive of impairment and yields low interrater agreement. The objective of this study was to enhance the diagnostic accuracy of ADHD by identifying the symptoms that are associated with impairment. METHOD: Semistructured interviews and impairment rating scales were administered to parents and teachers of 218 children. Combinations of ADHD symptoms were examined according to a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) based procedure to create diagnostic algorithms that predict impairment. RESULTS: In comparison with the DSM-IV, the ROC-based algorithms were 2 to 3 times more efficient in discriminating impaired from nonimpaired children. Parent and teacher agreement was also 3 times higher. CONCLUSIONS: Limiting the diagnosis to symptoms that predict impairment can increase the validity of the ADHD diagnosis. Results also support the use of ROC analyses in developing better diagnostic algorithms.     

Ten-year review of rating scales. V: scales assessing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE: This article summarizes information on scales assessing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents. METHOD: The authors sampled articles on ADHD over the past decade. Several popular older ADHD measures have recently been revised, and new ADHD scales have been developed. The authors selected primarily ADHD scales based on the DSM-IV construct of ADHD that also have multiple literature citations. They then reviewed their psychometric properties. Those with adequate psychometric functioning plus considerable literature citations, known wide usage in clinical practice, or a current niche are presented here. RESULTS: Several rating scales consistent with the DSM-IV conceptualization of ADHD are now available for use in both home and school settings. Many of the instruments demonstrate solid psychometric properties and a strong normative base. However, some popular scales have not been adequately investigated. Some measures are restricted to the comprehensive assessment of ADHD, whereas others also include symptoms of other disorders. The potential applications for these scales with youths diagnosed with ADHD are broad. CONCLUSIONS: Rating scales can reliably, validly, and efficiently measure DSM-IV-based ADHD symptoms in youths. They have great utility in research and clinical work, assist treatment planning, and help to ensure accountability in practice.     

Assessment and diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

ADHD is the most common psychiatric disorder of childhood (3% to 5% of children) with continued morbidity into adolescence (85%) and adulthood (50% to 70%). It is a condition associated with widespread significant impairment in academic, occupational, social, and emotional functioning. It is also a condition with a broad extensive differential diagnosis as well as a high rate of comorbidity. There is no diagnostically definitive test for ADHD. Therefore, assessments for ADHD need to be comprehensive and should involve multiple domains, informants, methods, and settings. The comprehensive assessment needs to determine whether the subject has ADHD or another disorder. Thus, evaluation of various organic conditions, functional disorders, developmental status, situational, environmental, and family problems should all be explored. The clinical interview of the child and family is one of the cornerstones of the assessment process. A comprehensive medical history and examination, psychoeducational tests, and school-related evaluation, as well as a view of the child's social and emotional functioning, are also crucial. A wide array of rating scales, tests, and measures have been developed (see Table 1) to aid in the systematic standardized assessment of the various deficits associated with ADHD. None of these tests is definitive, however. Recent development of tests of executive functioning, neuroimaging, and genetics may provide more exact diagnostic guidelines in the future. Current DSM-IV criteria are phenomenologic rather than etiologic and are much more relevant and appropriate for children with ADHD compared with adolescents and adults. A comprehensive assessment involving various domains of functioning (academic, social, emotional, physical, and familial) provide not only more accurate diagnosis but also directions as to what difficulties exist and what multifaceted treatment plan is needed to produce current improvement and long-term positive outcome.     

Blinded, multi-center validation of EEG and rating scales in identifying ADHD within a clinical sample

Previous validation studies of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) assessment by rating scales or EEG have provided Class-IV evidence per standards of the American Academy of Neurology. To investigate clinical applications, we collected Class-I evidence, namely from a blinded, prospective, multi-center study of a representative clinical sample categorized with a clinical standard. Participating males (101) and females (58) aged 6 to 18 had presented to one of four psychiatric and pediatric clinics because of the suspected presence of attention and behavior problems. DSM-IV diagnosis was performed by clinicians assisted with a semi-structured clinical interview. EEG (theta/beta ratio) and ratings scales (Conners Rating Scales-Revised and ADHD Rating Scales-IV) were collected separately in a blinded protocol. ADHD prevalence in the clinical sample was 61%, whereas the remainder had other childhood/adolescent disorders or no diagnosis. Comorbidities were observed in 66% of ADHD patients and included mood, anxiety, disruptive, and learning disorders at rates similar to previous findings. EEG identified ADHD with 87% sensitivity and 94% specificity. Rating scales provided sensitivity of 38-79% and specificity of 13-61%. While parent or teacher identification of ADHD by rating scales was reduced in accuracy when applied to a diverse clinical sample, theta/beta ratio changes remained consistent with the clinician's ADHD diagnosis. Because theta/beta ratio changes do not identify comorbidities or alternative diagnoses, the results do not support the use of EEG as a stand-alone diagnostic and should be limited to the interpretation that EEG may complement a clinical evaluation for ADHD.     

Le trouble déficit de l’attention/hyperactivité à l’âge adulte : concept, tableau clinique, stratégies diagnostiques et thérapeutiques

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) was considered, for a long time, as a disorder affecting children and adolescents, and was most often identified in the early development. It was less known that ADHD can be found in adults. Several arguments (clinics, neuropsychology, neuroanatomy, genetics, longitudinal studies and pharmacology) confirm that ADHD persists in adulthood for most of children and should be still treated, as long as the disorder leads to impairments. Nevertheless, ADHD in adults is considerably misdiagnosed in France. In fact, this can be explained by controverse, by its difficulty to be diagnosed, by a lack of consideration of developmental aspects… Diagnosis is based on clinical aspects, developmental and familial histories, adaptative strategies and functional alteration. Clinical interview put forward particularities in adulthood: decreasing (or change) of hyperactivity and impulsivity, persistance of attentional deficit, increasing of dysexecutive syndrome because demands in planification, social relationships and emotional management are often higher when people grow up. Several domains can be impaired: raising children, driving cars, working, taking care of themselves, daily managing… One of the most difficult issue about adult ADHD concerns criteriology. Although some authors (Wender, Hallowell and Ratey) have developped criteria based on more specific features of adulthood than those described in DSM-IV, criteria have still to be discussed: age-of-onset, number of symptoms required… Assesment scales can help clinicians to evaluate ADHD symptoms and impairments of their adult patients. Main scales are: Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS) and Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS) for detection, ADHD behaviour checklist and ADHD rating scale IV for diagnosis, Wender Utah Rating Scale (WURS) for retrospective diagnosis in childhood and Brown Attention Deficit Disorder Scale for a better evaluation of executive functions. This evaluation should be completed by neuropsychological testing. The results can confirm the diagnosis and guide the treatment according to the neuropsychological profile. The more salient tasks for the diagnosis of adult ADHD seem to be: Continuous Performance Test (CPT) for selective and sustained attention, Trail making Test part B for cognitive flexibility, Stroop color/word interference test for inhibition capacity, verbal fluency and processing speed in WAIS-R. It is thus extremely important: (i) to recognize that ADHD affects also adults, at high rate (4% of general population), (ii) to keep in mind that developmental particularities make the disorder more “cognitive” than “behavioral”, (iii) to clarify the link between adult ADHD and the others psychiatric disorders, especially bipolar disorder, (iv) and to know that most of the adults with ADHD can be successfully treated by psychostimulants and psychotherapy, as in childhood. In France, only few teams evaluate ADHD in adulthood. So, one of the purpose of our article is to enable a better consideration of adult ADHD in our country.     

New DSM-5 criteria for ADHD — Does it matter?

ObjectiveThe new Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM) requires the presence of fewer symptoms to make a diagnosis of adult ADHD while the criteria for diagnosis in childhood are unchanged as compared to previous editions. This study examines the prevalence of adults meeting the revised DSM-5 symptoms cutoff as compared to the previous DSM-IV symptoms cutoff.MethodThis study is part of a larger nationwide study that evaluated the use of, and the attitudes toward, ADHD medications by university students. 445 students from four major university faculties were surveyed and filled out questionnaires for our study.ResultsThe proportion of participants that met the minimum threshold of six out of nine current symptoms in either of the two DSM-IV symptom domains (inattentive presentation and hyperactive/impulsive presentation) for ADHD was 12.7% while the proportion that met the minimum threshold of five symptoms in either of the DSM-5 symptom domains was 21%.ConclusionSince the new DSM requires fewer current symptoms for a diagnosis of ADHD, a significant increase (65%) was observed in the number of participants meeting the new cutoff as compared to the old DSM-IV symptoms cutoff. This increase in the number of adults meeting symptoms cutoff may affect the rates of adults diagnosed with ADHD. Using the new criteria may identify more adults with ADHD and fewer diagnoses will be missed. However, meeting the new symptoms cutoff should be considered within the overall clinical context to prevent over-diagnosis.     

ADHS-Diagnose bei Erwachsenen

We report on a study comparing different systems for the diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adulthood. Recruited for evaluation were 168 patients referred to our ADHD outpatient unit. We used the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edn. (DSM-IV), International Classification of Diseases 10th edn. (ICD-10), and Utah criteria for diagnostic assessment and the Wender Utah rating scale, ADHD Self Report (ADHD-SR), and Wender Reimherr Adult Attention Deficit Disorder Rating Scale as psychopathological assessment tools. We present basic psychometric data of the Wender-Reimherr Interview (WRI). Internal consistency was determined as 0.82 (alpha). The inter-rater reliability was 1.0 (kappa coefficient) regarding ADHD diagnoses, and the ICC was 0.98 referring to the WRI total scores. The convergent validity with the ADHD-SR was 0.65 (Spearman coefficient). In 126 of 168 patients an ADHD diagnosis was made according to at least one of the three systems. The DSM-IV diagnostic set led to 119 ADHD diagnoses. As compared with the two other systems, this is about the minimum level for an ADHD diagnosis. All of the 87 ADHD diagnoses according to ICD-10 were covered by DSM-IV. The ICD-10 had no independent psychopathological items and therefore offered no additional points for the diagnostic procedure than the DSM-IV. The situation regarding Utah criteria is different. These criteria contain seven psychopathological domains: inattention, hyperactivity, disorganisation, impulsivity, affective lability, overreactivity, and hot temper. They can be assessed by use of the WRI. Ninety-three of 168 patients were diagnosed as having ADHD according to the Utah concept, which is much lower than with the DSM-IV. The particular definition of the disorder by the Utah criteria resulted in seven patients having only a Utah diagnosis but no DSM-IV diagnosis. Thus we are in a position to say that the Utah criteria have a relatively high level for making an ADHD diagnosis but in certain cases move beyond the DSM-IV. Of the patients 56% had ADHD diagnoses according to all three classification instruments. Examining the factor structure of the ADHD psychopathology represented by seven WRI and three ADHD-SR subscales, we found a two-factor solution explaining for 63% of the variance. Factor 1 was designated by impulsivity, affective lability, hyperactivity, and hot temper; factor 2 consisted of inattention, disorganisation, and overreactivity.     

How do different diagnostic criteria, age and gender affect the prevalence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults? An epidemiological study in a Hungarian community sample

The goal of the study was twofold: (1) to investigate the effect of different diagnostic criteria on prevalence estimates of adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and (2) to provide prevalence estimates of adult ADHD for the first time in a Hungarian sample. Subjects between 18 and 60 years were included in the screening phase of the study (N = 3,529), conducted in 17 GP practices in Budapest. Adult self-report scale 6-item version was used for screening. Out of 279 positively screened subjects 161 subjects participated in a clinical interview and filled out a self-report questionnaire to confirm the diagnosis. Beside DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, we applied four alternative diagnostic criteria: ‘No-onset’ (DSM-IV criteria without the specific requirement for onset); full/Sx (DSM-IV “symptoms only” criteria); and reduced/Sx (DSM-IV “symptoms only” criteria with a reduced threshold for symptom count). Crude prevalence estimates adjusted for the specificity and sensitivity data of the screener were 1.35% in the ‘DSM-IV’ group, 1.64% in the ‘No-onset’ group, 3.65% in the ‘Sx/full’ group and 4.16% in the ‘Sx/reduced’ group. Logistic regression analysis showed that ADHD was significantly more prevalent with younger age and male gender [χ² = 14.46; P = 0.0007]. Prevalence estimates corrected for the ‘not-interviewed’ subsample and adjusted for specificity and sensitivity data of the screener was 2.3% in males, 0.91% in females; 2.02% in the ≤40 years age group and 0.70% in the >40 years age group, based on DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. Prevalence rates found in this study are somewhat lower, but still are in line with those reported in the literature.     

The role of neuropsychological assessment in adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders

Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by inattention, hyperactivity and/or impulsivity. While ADHD was initially recognized as a childhood syndrome, scientific evidence accumulated to indicate that a significant proportion of ADHD children continue to experience symptoms of ADHD in adulthood. Moreover, the question of ADHD diagnosis can arise in adult patients who were not diagnosed in childhood. Currently, the diagnosis of ADHD in adulthood is based on the revised criteria described for children. However, their application for adults may be difficult for many reasons including compensation and comorbid disorders. To date, no clinical, neuropsychological, biological or imaging marker is available for the diagnosis of ADHD. Considering that ADHD is based on a neuropsychological model, in this article we will examine the usefulness of neuropsychological testing in the diagnosis in adults. We will first present diagnostic criteria of ADHD and the limits of their application in adults. We will then detail the neuropsychological data available in adult ADHD and the French and international clinical recommendations for neuropsychological assessment. Finally, we will explore the predictive value of neuropsychological scores in the diagnosis of ADHD and discuss key methodological points and perspectives for clinical research.     

Comorbidity of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and bipolar disorder: prevalence and clinical correlates

The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) comorbidity with lifetime bipolar disorder, and the influence of this comorbidity on various demographic and clinical variables in patients. Patients (n = 159) with a previous diagnosis of bipolar disorder (79 female, 80 male) were included in this study. All patients were interviewed for the presence of current adult and childhood ADHD diagnosis and other axis I psychiatric disorder comorbidities using the structured clinical interview for DSM-IV (SCID) and the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Age Children—Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL). The subjects also completed a Wender Utah rating scale (WURS-25) and a Current Symptoms Scale for ADHD symptoms. In particular, patients’ clinical characteristics, the age of onset of bipolar disorder, and the number of episodes were noted. Twenty-six of the 159 bipolar patients (16.3%) were diagnosed with adult ADHD, while another subgroup of patients (n = 17, 10.7%) received a diagnosis of childhood ADHD but did not fulfill criteria for adult ADHD. Both of these two subgroups (patients with adult ADHD, and patients with only childhood ADHD) had an earlier age of onset of the disease and a higher number of previous total affective or depressive episodes than those without any lifetime ADHD comorbidity. However only bipolar patients with adult ADHD comorbidity had higher lifetime comorbidity rates for axis I psychiatric disorders, such as panic disorder and alcohol abuse/dependence, compared to patients without lifetime ADHD. Bipolar patients with comorbid adult ADHD did not differ from bipolar patients with comorbid childhood ADHD in terms of any demographic or clinical variables except for adult ADHD scale scores. In conclusion, ADHD is a common comorbidity in bipolar patients, and it adversely affects the course of the disease and disrupts the social adjustment of the patients. Regular monitoring of ADHD will help to prevent problems and complications that could arise in the course of the disease, particularly in patients with early onset bipolar disorder.     

Discrimination between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and reactive attachment disorder in school aged children

We aimed to determine whether it is possible to discriminate between children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and children with reactive attachment disorder (RAD) using standardized assessment tools for RAD. The study involved 107 children: 38 with a diagnosis of RAD and 30 with ADHD were recruited through community child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) and specialist ADHD clinics. In addition, 39 typically developing children were recruited through family practice. Clinicians were trained to use a standardized assessment package for RAD using a DVD with brief follow-up support. Discriminant function analysis was used to identify the items in the standardized assessment package that best discriminated between children with ADHD and children with RAD. Clinicians’ ratings of RAD symptoms were reliable, particularly when focusing on eight core DSM-IV symptoms of RAD. Certain parent-report symptoms were highly discriminatory between children with ADHD and children with RAD. These symptoms included “cuddliness with strangers” and “comfort-seeking with strangers”. A semi-structured interview with parents, observation of the child in the waiting room and teacher report of RAD symptoms aided diagnostic discrimination between the groups. Clinical diagnosis of RAD can be made reliably by clinicians, especially when focusing on eight core RAD symptoms. Clear discrimination can be made between children with RAD and children with ADHD.     

Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit‑/Hyperaktivitätssyndrom (ADHS) und komorbide psychische Erkrankungen

Background

It is still unclear how well the established attention deficit-hyperactive disorder (ADHD)-specific rating scales can differentiate between ADHD symptoms and symptoms of other mental disorders.

Methods

A total of 274 patients with suspected adult ADHD were extensively examined clinically and guideline-conform in an ADHD outpatient clinic. In 190 patients the diagnosis of ADHD could be made with certainty. The patients were also subsequently assessed according to the DSM IV criteria by self-rating scales on current (ADHS-SB, ASRS, CAARS) and retrospective (WURS-K) complaints. A binary logistic regression analysis was performed in order to extract from the questionnaires, which could best distinguish the diagnosis of ADHD from other mental disorders.

Results

The results showed that two self-rating scales (WURS-K and ADHS-SB) were sufficient to correctly diagnose ADHD in 83% of the patients examined with a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 56%.

Conclusion

The ADHD-specific self-rating scales are additionally useful for the diagnostic differentiation between ADHD-specific and other psychiatric symptoms in the clinical practice and can improve the safety of the diagnosis.

     

The Comorbidity of Pervasive Developmental Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Results of a Retrospective Chart Review

Objective: To determine if a sample of children meeting diagnostic criteria for a Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) display symptoms and impairment related to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) sufficient to warrant a comorbid diagnosis of ADHD. Further, do children with PDD displaying such symptoms demonstrate more impairment in daily life activities than those children only having PDD? Method: A retrospective chart review was conducted on children (N = 57) diagnosed with the PDD's of Autism or PDD-Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS), or ADHD. Comparative analysis of questionnaire and neuropsychological test data was completed to determine the severity of ADHD-like symptoms presenting among children with PDD. Results: From the pool of subjects having PDD with sufficient data (N = 27), 7 or 26% met DSM-IV criteria for the combined type of ADHD. Nine or 33% met diagnostic criteria for the Inattentive Type of ADHD and 11 or 41% did not demonstrate a significant number of ADHD symptoms to warrant a comorbid diagnosis of ADHD. Results indicate that a subgroup of children with PDD displaying significant ADHD-like symptoms may in fact have ADHD thus warranting a comorbid diagnosis of ADHD. Current data did not suggest children with PDD and the combined type of ADHD demonstrated significantly more impairment in daily life functioning than those children only having PDD. However, this appeared likely the result of small sample size. The data, however, does indicate such children experience more difficulties in daily situations as rated by parents and teachers. Conclusion: These findings reinforce clinical observations indicating that some children with PDD may also experience an independent comorbid condition of ADHD, suggesting that a comorbid diagnosis of ADHD with PDD be considered in such cases. If further findings are replicated, the current exclusionary DSM-IV-TR criteria of making such a comorbid diagnosis should be re-considered.     

Assessing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults: focus on rating scales

The diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults can be a challenging process because it includes making judgments based on clinical interviews, rating scale results, informant ratings, and objective supporting evidence. The patient evaluation should gather information on the severity and frequency of symptoms, the establishment of childhood onset of symptoms, the chronicity and pervasiveness of symptoms, and the impact of symptoms on major life activities. Some of the rating scales being used in the adult population are the Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales, the Brown Attention-Deficit Disorder Scale for Adults, the Wender Utah Rating Scale, the ADHD Rating Scale and ADHD Rating Scale-IV, the Current Symptoms Scale, and the recently-developed Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale-v1.1 Symptom Checklist. More research is needed to establish the usefulness of self-administered rating scales compared with investigator-administered scales in the assessment and diagnosis of adult ADHD.