Combination lithium and Divalproex sodium in pediatric bipolarity

ABSTRACT Objective: It has been reported that bipolar disorder may become less responsive to previously effective treatment with each symptomatic relapse. The primary goal of this study was to assess the rate of restabilization after the resumption of lithium (L

An Open-Label Study of Aripiprazole in Children with a Bipolar Disorder

Abstract Objective: The purpose of this open-label study was to describe the effectiveness of aripiprazole (APZ) in the treatment of children with bipolar disorders suffering from manic symptomatology. Method: Symptomatic outpatients (Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] score !15) meeting strict, unmodified, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, diagnostic symptom criteria for a bipolar disorder, ages 4-9 years, were eligible. Subjects were treated prospectively with flexible doses of APZ (maximum daily dose of 15 mg/day), for up to 16 weeks or until a priori response criteria were met. Outcome measures included the YMRS, Clinical Global Impressions ScaleSeverity, Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS), and the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R). A priori response criteria consisted of 3 of 4 consecutive weeks with (1) CDRS-R <29; (2) YMRS <10; and (3) CGAS >50. Results: Ninety-six children (62 males; mean age of 6.9 (SD ¼ 1.7), received APZ for an average length of treatment of 12.5 (SD ¼ 3.9) weeks. Significant improvements in YMRS, CDRS-R, CGAS, and Clinical Global Impressions Scale-Severity scores ( p < 0.001) were noted at the end of study participation. Sixty of the subjects (62.5%) met a priori response criteria at study's end. The most common side effects noted were stomachache, increased appetite, and headache. Two subjects were removed from the study due to side effects [epistaxis (n ¼ 1); akathisia (n ¼ 1)]. Subjects experienced an average weight gain of 2.4 (SD ¼ 1.9) kg. Conclusion: APZ may be effective in the acute treatment of symptoms of children with bipolar illnesses

Is Caregiver-Adolescent Disagreement Due to Differences in Thresholds for Reporting Manic Symptoms?

Abstract Introduction: Cross-informant disagreement is common and results in different interpretations of a youth's behavior. Theoretical explanations for discrepancies typically rely on scale level analyses. This article explores whether caregivers and adolescents differ in when they notice and report symptoms of youth mania depending on the severity of overall manic disturbance. Method: Participants were 459 adolescent-caregiver pairs recruited at either a community mental health center or an academic medical center. Adolescents were most likely to have a primary diagnosis of unipolar depression (37%) or attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder/disruptive behavior disorder (36%). Nineteen percent of adolescents received a bipolar spectrum disorder diagnosis (4% bipolar I and 15% bipolar II, cyclothymia, or bipolar not otherwise specificed). Caregivers were primarily biological mothers (74%) or grandparents (8%). Adolescents and caregivers independently completed the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) about the adolescent. Results: Item response theory analyses of the entire sample indicated that in general, both caregivers and adolescents reserved endorsement of mania symptoms for the most severely ill half of participants. Comparisons of caregiver and adolescent report of symptoms on the MDQ indicated two significant differences. Caregivers were more likely to report irritability at significantly lower severity of mania than adolescents. Adolescents endorsed only increased energy or hyperactivity at lower severities than caregivers. Conclusions: Adolescents and caregivers will have different concerns and might report different symptoms consistent with whom the symptom impacts first. Caregivers are more likely to report behaviors such as irritability, whereas adolescents are more likely to report subjective feelings such as feeling more energetic or more hyperactive

Informant Discrepancies in Clinical Reports of Youths and Interviewers' Impressions of the Reliability of Informants

Abstract Objective: In this study the authors examined whether discrepancies between parent and youth reports of the youth's emotional and behavioral functioning are related to interviewers' reliability ratings of parents and youths. Methods: In a consecutive case series analysis of 328 parents and youths aged 11-17 years, parents and youths provided reports of youth emotional and behavioral functioning and participated in structured clinical interviews. At the conclusion of the interviews, interviewers rated the reliability of informants. Interviewers rated youths' clinical severity and parents and youths provided information on youth demographics. Nominal logistic regressions tested patterns of discrepancies between parent and youth reports (i.e., which informant consistently reported greater degrees of youth emotional and behavioral concerns than the other) as predictors of interviewers' ratings of the reliability of parents and youths. All analyses controlled for variance explained by youth demographics and youth severity. Results: When parents reported greater degrees of youth emotional and behavioral concerns than youths self-reported, interviewers were likely to rate the youth as an unreliable informant, and were unlikely to rate the youth as an unreliable informant when parents reported less concerns than youths self-reported. However, interviewers' ratings of parents' reliability did not relate to the discrepancies between reports, regardless of which informant reported greater degrees of youth concerns. Conclusions: Prior research indicates that informant discrepancies potentially reveal important information of youths' emotional and behavioral concerns, such as the settings in which youths express these concerns. Yet, when parents and youths disagree in their clinical reports of the youth's functioning, this relates to whether a clinical interviewer views the youth as a reliable informant of their own functioning. To increase the cost-effectiveness and clinical utility of multi-informant clinical evaluations, practitioners and researchers should anticipate informant discrepancies and predict what they may represent before conducting clinical evaluations