Search

ObjectivesOver 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.MethodsAn 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.ResultsSubstantial, 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.ConclusionsAs 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.

Objective: Understanding prognosis is critical to anticipating public health needs and providing care to individuals with psychotic disorders. However, the long-term course of remission and recovery remains unclear. In this study, the most common trajectories of illness course are described for a cohort of individuals followed for 25 years since first admission for psychosis. Methods: Participants are from the Suffolk County Mental Health Project, an epidemiological study of first-admission psychosis. Data for the present study was collected from six follow-ups, with 311 individuals assessed at the 25-year follow-up. Common patterns of remission and recovery were assessed in the baseline cohort of 591 individuals and the subsample from the 25-year follow up. Results: In the baseline cohort and the 25-year subsample, the most common trajectory for individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders was no remission and no recovery. Among individuals with other psychotic disorders, in both the baseline and 25-year cohorts, the modal pattern was one of intermittent remission and recovery. Individuals with other psychotic disorders were more likely to experience stable remission (15.1%) and stable recovery (21.1%), outcomes that were rare among individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (0% and 0.6%, respectively). Conclusions: The modal longitudinal pattern for individuals with other psychoses is one of multiple transitions into and out of symptomatic and functional recovery. Engagement in a long-term health care plan may help individuals detect and respond to these changes. Sustained remission and recovery are rare among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Efforts should be directed toward developing more effective treatments for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognition of hyperactivity, impulsivity, distractibility, and emotional lability as a clinical syndrome is at the heart of identifying whether there is a discoverer of the condition of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Just as clinics of children diagnosed with ADHD do not capture a homogeneous group of boys and girls, however, history does not either. What different observers/clinicians have chosen to highlight reflects what is important to them and to the times in which they lived. The child/children described by Heinrich Hoffman (of Fidgety Phil fame) and George Still (who highlighted impulsive aggression as a moral defect), for instance, did not come with a list of criteria (with which even now we cannot always agree) to prove unequivocally that they had ADHD. Who cares! It is sufficient that they recognized the importance of certain co‐occurring behaviors and shared their observations with us such that we can conclude our clinic's children were recognized by good past observers. ADHD‐like children, like the poor, have probably always been with us. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognition of the importance of irritable mood and outbursts has been increasing over the past several decades. This “Future Directions” aims to develop a set of recommendations for future research emphasizing that irritable mood and outbursts “hang together,” but have important distinctions and thus also need to “hang separately.” Outbursts that are the outcome of irritable mood may be quite different from outbursts that are the trigger or driving force that make youth and his/her environment miserable. What, then, is the relation between irritable mood and outbursts? As the field currently stands, we not only cannot answer this question, but we may also lack the tools to effectively do so. Here, we will propose recommendations for understanding the phenomenology of irritable mood and outbursts so that more directed and clinically useful assessment tools can be designed. We discuss the transdiagnostic and treatment implications that relate to improvements in measurement. We describe the need to do more than repurpose our current assessment tools, specifically interviews and rating scales, which were designed for different purposes. The future directions of the study and treatment of irritable mood and outbursts will require, among others, using universally accepted nomenclature, supporting the development of tools to measure the characteristics of each irritable mood and outbursts, understanding the effects of question order, informant, development and longitudinal course, and studying the ways in which outbursts and irritable mood respond to treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Irritability symptoms are closely associated with, and may reflect, temperament traits, particularly negative affectivity (NA). However, there are few empirical data on the relationships between child temperament and irritability symptoms. Method: We investigated cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between irritability symptoms and temperament traits from age 3–15 in a community sample of 609 children and their parents. Irritability symptoms were assessed through structured interviews with parents at ages 3/ 6, and inventories completed by parents and youth at ages 12/15. Temperament traits were assessed using parent reports at ages 3/6, and parent and child reports at ages 12/15. Path analysis and structural equation modeling were used to explore longitudinal associations from ages 3–6 and 12–15, respectively. Results: Higher levels of irritability symptoms at ages 3/6 were concurrently associated with higher levels of NA and lower levels of effortful control (EC). In adolescence, higher irritability symptoms were concurrently associated with higher negative temperament and disinhibition. In longitudinal analyses from age 3–6 and 12–15, irritability symptoms showed modest but significant stability after adjusting for the stability of temperament traits. However, there were significant differences in the stability paths at age 3–6, reflecting lower stability of irritability symptoms. Finally, EC at age 3 predicted increased irritability symptoms at age 6, while irritability symptoms at age 3 predicted increased NA at age 6. Conclusion: Irritability symptoms are robustly associated with both temperamental NA and difficulty regulating attention and behavior. These findings help situate irritability symptoms within widely accepted temperament/personality taxonomies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comorbid externalizing and internalizing disorders are common in offspring of a parent with bipolar I or II disorder. In some cases, the symptoms are harbingers of future bipolar spectrum disorder. Even when they are not, they are likely to be impairing to the child. Clinicians need to be better informed about how the history leading up to mania/hypomania unfolds, and what comorbid disorders are impairing in and of themselves. More information is needed about the parents' psychopathology, course of illness and response to treatment. Until we have data on how to prevent bipolar disorder, the best course of action is to treat the child's current impairing symptoms and render the parent as asymptomatic as possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]