Diagnosing ADHD in Adolescence

Objective: This study examines adolescent-specific practical problems associated with current practice parameters for diagnosing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to inform recommendations for the diagnosis of ADHD in adolescents. Specifically, issues surrounding the use of self- versus informant ratings, diagnostic threshold, and retrospective reporting of childhood symptoms were addressed. Method: Using data from the Pittsburgh ADHD Longitudinal Study (PALS), parent, teacher, and self-reports of symptoms and impairment were examined for 164 adolescents with a childhood diagnosis of ADHD (age M = 14.74 years) and 119 demographically similar non-ADHD controls (total N = 283). Results: Results indicated that 70% of the well-diagnosed childhood ADHD group continued to meet Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text rev.; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) diagnostic criteria for ADHD in adolescence; however, an additional 17% possessed clinically significant impairment in adolescence but did not qualify for a current ADHD diagnosis. The optimal source of information was combined reports from the parent and a core academic teacher. Adolescents with ADHD met criteria for very few symptoms of hyperactivity/impulsivity, suggesting a need to revisit the diagnostic threshold for these items. Additionally, emphasis on impairment, rather than symptom threshold, improved identification of adolescents with a gold-standard childhood diagnosis of ADHD and persistent ADHD symptoms. Parent retrospective reports of baseline functioning, but not adolescent self-reports, were significantly correlated with reports collected at baseline in childhood. Conclusions: Recommendations are offered for diagnosing ADHD in adolescence based on these findings

When Diagnosing ADHD in Young Adults Emphasize Informant Reports, DSM Items, and Impairment

Objective: This study examined several questions about the diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in young adults using data from a childhood-diagnosed sample of 200 individuals with ADHD (age M = 20.20 years) and 121 demographically similar non-ADHD controls (total N = 321). Method: We examined the use of self-versus informant ratings of current and childhood functioning and evaluated the diagnostic utility of adult-specific items versus items from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Results: Results indicated that although a majority of young adults with a childhood diagnosis of ADHD continued to experience elevated ADHD symptoms (75%) and clinically significant impairment (60%), only 9.6%–19.7% of the childhood ADHD group continued to meet DSM–IV–TR (DSM, 4th ed., text rev.) criteria for ADHD in young adulthood. Parent report was more diagnostically sensitive than self-report. Young adults with ADHD tended to underreport current symptoms, while young adults without ADHD tended to overreport symptoms. There was no significant incremental benefit beyond parent report alone to combining self-report with parent report. Non-DSM-based, adult-specific symptoms of ADHD were significantly correlated with functional impairment and endorsed at slightly higher rates than the DSM-IV-TR symptoms. However, DSM-IV-TR items tended to be more predictive of diagnostic group membership than the non-DSM adult-specific items due to elevated control group item endorsement. Conclusions: Implications for the assessment and treatment of ADHD in young adults are discussed (i.e., collecting informant reports, lowering the diagnostic threshold, emphasizing impairment, and cautiously interpreting retrospective reports)