Psychoeducational group interventions for adults diagnosed with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder: a scoping review of feasibility, acceptability, and outcome measures.

INTRODUCTION: Although psychoeducational group interventions are increasingly used for adults diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a comprehensive review focused on the feasibility and acceptability indicators of these interventions remains lacking. Furthermore, although previous research has explored various aspects of psychoeducation for ADHD, such as its definition and approaches, limited research has focused on the synthesis for outcome measures and patients' experiences related to these interventions. Therefore, this scoping review aims to map the existing evidence reported on psychoeducational group interventions for adults diagnosed with ADHD. The objective is to provide a comprehensive overview of feasibility indicators, acceptability, and outcome measures used in psychoeducational group interventions. METHOD: A comprehensive structured literature search on the topic was performed in seven bibliographic databases, and the resulting records were independently screened, and their data extracted by two reviewers. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-S) to ensure the transparency and rigor of this scoping review. RESULTS: The searches yielded 7510 records. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. These included studies were conducted in European countries and the United States. Among these, six studies used a randomized control design, one an open feasibility trial, and one a pre-post intervention design. All the studies reported some feasibility and acceptability indicators. While all the studies reported on the severity of symptoms of ADHD as an outcome measure, some also reported on outcomes related to psychological or mental-health problems, quality of life, changes in knowledge regarding ADHD, or the level of self-esteem, functioning, and impairment. CONCLUSION: This scoping review revealed that psychoeducational group interventions are generally acceptable for patients in terms of patient satisfaction with the group intervention. All included studies reported some feasibility indicators, with some reporting good attendance and relatively low dropout rates. Most studies reported positive effects on ADHD and mental health symptoms, suggesting that these interventions are beneficial for adults with ADHD. However, several gaps exist regarding the reporting on the feasibility indicators, acceptability, and outcome measures employed across studies.

Psychoeducation for adult ADHD: a scoping review about characteristics, patient involvement, and content.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial interventions such as psychoeducation are increasingly being used to treat adult ADHD, both as an alternative and as a supplement to pharmacotherapy. A thorough overview of the literature on psychoeducation for adult ADHD is lacking. The objectives of this scoping review were therefore to identify the characteristics of psychoeducation interventions designed for adults with ADHD, examine how the patient experience or perspective is considered during the intervention's development and implementation, determine the typical themes covered, and explore how 'psychoeducation' is defined in these interventions. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed to identify records in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, AMED, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two or more reviewers were included in every step of the screening process and the final selection of included studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist (Supplementary Material 1) was used to report the results, and the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley was used as a guide throughout the scoping process. RESULTS: A total of 2121 records were identified through the literature search. After screening and full-text analysis, ten studies were included for final analysis. Most studies were conducted in Europe and followed a group format. Seven main themes were identified: Information about the diagnosis, treatment options, somatic health and ADHD, the insider perspective, ADHD and social life, coping and psychological skills, and ADHD and work. There was significant overlap in themes covered, but coverage of each theme varied. Themes deemed important by newer research, such as sexuality and gender-specific issues, were missing. Only one intervention involved patients in its development and implementation, and two interventions involved family members. There was variation in how psychoeducation was defined in the included studies, and the implications of this are discussed. CONCLUSION: The literature on psychoeducation for adult ADHD is not ready for any systematic effect estimation. Before such estimations are conducted, a shared understanding and definition of psychoeducation are needed. The involvement of end users in the development and delivery of interventions may aid reach this goal but results from this review indicate that such practices are rare.

Measuring patient satisfaction with four items: validity of the client satisfaction questionnaire 4 in an outpatient population.

INTRODUCTION: Patient satisfaction with mental health services has for several decades been considered an important component when evaluating service quality. It is often assessed in the context of monitoring quality of care, developing or evaluating newly implemented interventions or changes in practice. Because of this, patient satisfaction questionnaires are often added to longer questionnaire batteries, and shorter questionnaires are preferred to prevent respondent fatigue and non-compliance and to secure easy implementation. However, most studies use unvalidated patient satisfaction measures, making comparisons between studies difficult. Validation studies of short patient satisfaction measures are therefore warranted. METHODS: The primary aim was to examine the construct validity and internal reliability of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-4 (CSQ-4) in a Norwegian outpatient mental health setting. A total of 467 patients were recruited from an outpatient psychiatric care clinic in Central Norway. The secondary aim was to examine an earlier proposed cutoff for classifying dissatisfied patients in this new population. A principal component analysis was conducted to evaluate factor structure, correlation analyses were conducted to test for predicted relationships, and Cronbach's alpha was calculated to examine internal reliability. RESULTS: The CSQ-4 showed a clear unidimensional structure with one factor explaining 80% of its variance. Its internal reliability was very high, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.92. As hypothesised this study found no statistically significant sex differences in satisfaction and no statistically significant association between age and satisfaction. Positive changes in symptoms during treatment and higher post-treatment functional impairment were associated with higher patient-reported treatment satisfaction scores, which indicates good construct validity. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the CSQ-4 in a psychiatric population. The CSQ-4 demonstrated good structural validity and internal reliability and was correlated with outcome variables in terms of symptom change and post-treatment functioning. In sum, this indicates that the CSQ-4 is a good short alternative for evaluating patient satisfaction in routine outpatient mental health care.

The construct validity of an abridged version of the general self-efficacy scale for adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Objectives: The General Self-Efficacy (GSE) scale is a validated self-rated questionnaire increasingly used in mental health research. However, despite several psychometric advantages of the GSE scale, its validity in those diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has not yet been examined. Moreover, a shorter version of the GSE scale would contribute to a more rational use of resources in extensive multivariate studies. Therefore, as self-rated scales to measure self-efficacy in this population are lacking, the current study aims to develop a condensed version of the GSE for adults with ADHD. Methods: A group of patient collaborators (user representatives) from an ADHD organization and health professionals shortened the original 10-item GSE scale to six items and evaluated the content validity of the revised scale. Second, 525 potential participants were invited to participate in a cross-sectional study conducted in 2021 (between January 19th and February 7th). Of them, 403 filled out the GSE-6 for ADHD and two scales measuring psychological well-being and mental health (the five-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index, WHO-5, and the four-item Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-4). The psychometric properties of the new scale were examined, testing a priori formulated hypotheses. Results: The brief GSE-6 for ADHD displayed good internal consistency with a Cronbach's α of 0.907. No floor or ceiling effect was detected. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a one-factor structure. The GSE-6 also showed a moderate positive correlation with the WHO-5 (rs = 0.578) and a moderate negative correlation with the depression and anxiety rating scale PHQ-4 (rs = -0.595). Conclusion: The 6-item GSE for ADHD was evaluated to have good content validity. The scale demonstrated good psychometric properties. The results indicate that the GSE-6 may help assess self-efficacy in adults with ADHD.

Multicenter survey of endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux using polyacrylate-polyalcohol bulking copolymer (Vantris).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an outcome of endoscopic correction of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) using Vantris (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina) in terms of its effectiveness and morbidity in a multicenter study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2009 to 2013, 611 patients (210 boys and 401 girls) with a mean age of 3.56 years (range, 1 month-18 years) were treated at 7 centers worldwide endoscopically with Vantris injection. VUR was unilateral in 413 and bilateral in 198 patients comprising 809 renal refluxing units (RRUs). Of these, primary VUR was present in 674 RRUs (83.3%) and 135 (16.7%) were complex cases. Reflux was grades I-V in 24 (2.96%), 123 (15.2%), 451 (55.8%), 158 (19.5%), and 53 (6.6%) RRUs respectively. The follow-up continued from 6 to 54 months. RESULTS: Reflux resolved in 759 RRUs (93.8%) after first Vantris injection, in 26 (3.1%) after second, and in 6 (0.7%) after third injection, respectively. VUR improved to grade I after 1 or 2 injections in 5 ureters (0.6%), which needed no further treatment. Thirteen ureters (1.6%) failed endoscopic correction and required ureteral reimplantation. Vesicoureteral junction obstruction requiring ureteral reimplantation developed in 6 ureters (0.7%) and in 4 (0.5%) required stent insertion. Twenty-three patients (3.8%) suffered afebrile urinary tract infection. Seven (1.2%) developed febrile urinary tract infection. None of the studied patients demonstrated VUR recurrence on voiding cystourethrography. CONCLUSION: The results of this multicenter survey confirm that endoscopic subureteral Vantris injection is a simple, safe, and effective outpatient procedure for treating all grades of VUR.