Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Psychiatric Traits and Diagnoses within a Community-based Sample of Children and Youth: Disparités raciales/ethniques dans les traits et diagnostics psychiatriques au sein d'un échantillon communautaire d'enfants et de jeunes.

OBJECTIVE: Racial/ethnic disparities in the prevalence of psychiatric disorders have been reported, but have not accounted for the prevalence of the traits that underlie these disorders. Examining rates of diagnoses in relation to traits may yield a clearer understanding of the degree to which racial/ethnic minority youth in Canada differ in their access to care. We sought to examine differences in self/parent-reported rates of diagnoses for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and anxiety disorders after adjusting for differences in trait levels between youth from three racial/ethnic groups: White, South Asian and East Asian. METHOD: We collected parent or self-reported ratings of OCD, ADHD and anxiety traits and diagnoses for 6- to 17-year-olds from a Canadian general population sample (Spit for Science). We examined racial/ethnic differences in trait levels and the odds of reporting a diagnosis using mixed-effects linear models and logistic regression models. RESULTS: East Asian (N = 1301) and South Asian (N = 730) youth reported significantly higher levels of OCD and anxiety traits than White youth (N = 6896). East Asian and South Asian youth had significantly lower odds of reporting a diagnosis for OCD (odds ratio [OR]East Asian = 0.08 [0.02, 0.41]; ORSouth Asian = 0.05 [0.00, 0.81]), ADHD (OREast Asian = 0.27 [0.16, 0.45]; ORSouth Asian = 0.09 [0.03, 0.30]) and anxiety (OREast Asian = 0.21 [0.11, 0.39]; ORSouth Asian = 0.12 [0.05, 0.32]) than White youth after accounting for psychiatric trait levels. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a discrepancy between trait levels of OCD, ADHD and anxiety and rates of diagnoses for East Asian and South Asian youth. This discrepancy may be due to increased barriers for ethnically diverse youth to access mental health care. Efforts to understand and mitigate these barriers in Canada are needed.

We know that there is there are differences in the prevalence of childhood mental illnesses by race/ethnic group, which may be related to disproportionate access to mental health care. What is unknown is whether there this difference in prevalence is related to differences in the presence of symptoms for mental illness or whether children and youth from marginalized racial/ethnic groups have symptoms but are not getting diagnosed. This information is needed to understand the degree to which children and youth from marginalized race/ethnicity groups are accessing mental health care in Canada. We tested the differences in reported symptoms and diagnosis of three common and impairing childhood-onset disorders (obsessive-compulsive disorder­OCD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder­ADHD and anxiety disorders) in children and youth (6­17 years of age) living in Canada that were from three racial/ethnic groups: White, South Asian and East Asian. East Asian and South Asian youth reported significantly higher levels of OCD and anxiety traits than White youth. However, East Asian and South Asian youth were significantly less likely than White youth to have a reported diagnosis of OCD, ADHD or anxiety even after accounting for symptom levels for each disorder. Our findings suggest that East and South Asian children are less likely than White children to get a diagnosis for common mental illness even if they have symptoms of that mental illness. This gap in receiving a diagnosis might be because of more barriers to mental health care for children and youth from marginalized racial/ethnic groups but we need more research to pinpoint the cause.

Predictors of psychiatric aftercare among formerly hospitalized adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: Timely aftercare can be viewed as a patient safety imperative. In the context of decreasing inpatient length of stay (LOS) and known child psychiatry human resource challenges, we investigated time to aftercare for adolescents following psychiatric hospitalization. METHOD: We conducted a population-based cohort study of adolescents aged 15 to 19 years with psychiatric discharge between April 1, 2002, and March 1, 2004, in Ontario, using encrypted identifiers across health administrative databases to determine time to first psychiatric aftercare with a primary care physician (PCP) or a psychiatrist within 395 days of discharge. RESULTS: Among the 7111 adolescents discharged in the study period, 24% had aftercare with a PCP or a psychiatrist within 7 days and 49% within 30 days. High socioeconomic status (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] 1.31; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.43, P < 0.001) and psychotic disorders (AHR 1.24; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.36, P < 0.001) were associated with greater likelihood of aftercare. Youth in the northern part of the province (AHR 0.48; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.71, P < 0.001), rural areas (AHR 0.82; 95% CI 0.76 to 0.89, P < 0.001), and with self-harm or suicide attempts (AHR 0.58; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.64, P < 0.001) and substance use disorders (AHR 0.50; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.56, P < 0.001) were less likely to receive aftercare. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization is our most intensive, intrusive, and expensive psychiatric treatment setting, yet in our cohort of formerly hospitalized adolescents fewer than 50% received psychiatry-related aftercare in the month postdischarge. Innovations are necessary to address geographic inequities and improve timely access to mental health aftercare for all youth.

Aftercare, emergency department visits, and readmission in adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: U.S. and Canadian data demonstrate decreasing inpatient days, increasing nonurgent emergency department (ED) visits, and short supply of child psychiatrists. Our study aims to determine whether aftercare reduces ED visits and/or readmission in adolescents with first psychiatric hospitalization. METHOD: We conducted a population-based cohort analysis using linked health administrative databases with accrual from April 1, 2002, to March 1, 2004. The study cohort included all 15- to 19-year-old adolescents with first psychiatric admission. Adolescents with and without aftercare in the month post-discharge were matched on their propensity to receive aftercare. Our primary outcome was time to first psychiatric ED visit or readmission. Secondary outcomes were time to first psychiatric ED visit and readmission, separately. RESULTS: We identified 4,472 adolescents with first-time psychiatric admission. Of these, 57% had aftercare in the month post-discharge. Propensity-score-based matching, which accounted for each individual's propensity for aftercare, produced a cohort of 3,004 adolescents. In matched analyses, relative to those with no aftercare in the month post-discharge, those with aftercare had increased likelihood of combined outcome (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05-1.42), and readmission (HR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.14-1.66), but not ED visits (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.95-1.37). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are provocative: we found that aftercare in the month post-discharge increased the likelihood of readmission but not ED visit. Over and above confounding by severity and Canadian/U.S. systems differences, our results may indicate a relative lack of psychiatric services for youth. Our results point to the need for improved data capture of pediatric mental health service use.

Using the Conners' Teacher Rating Scale-Revised in school children referred for assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Predictive validity of the Conners' Teacher Rating Scale-Revised (CTRS-R) was evaluated against a semi-structured clinical teacher interview in school children referred for diagnostic assessment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We hypothesized that extreme scale values would increase diagnostic certainty and that classification errors would be associated with comorbid conditions. METHOD: Children (n = 1038), aged 6 to 12 years, were screened using the CTRS-R and their teachers were interviewed. Three levels of T scores on the 3 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) subscales of the CTRS-R were compared with DSM-IV symptom thresholds by interview. Where subscale scores and interviews showed highest agreement, presence of comorbid disruptive behavioural disorders, reading disability, language impairment, and low IQ were investigated for children classified correctly, compared with incorrectly. RESULTS: T scores of 60 and above on all CTRS-R DSM-IV subscales offered high sensitivity, from 91% to 94%. Only on subscales M (hyperactive-impulsive) and N (total) did T scores of less than 60 offer posttest probabilities of less than 10%, confirming that a child does not reach diagnostic threshold by interview. T scores of 80 and more offered high specificity, from 88% to 93%, but did not provide high posttest probabilities that children reach diagnostic criteria. Classification errors were associated with more language impairment among false positives than true positives on the M (18.9%, compared with 11.3%, P = 0.04) and N (19.0%, compared with 9.5%, P = 0.023) subscales, and more reading disabilities among false positives than among true positives on the N subscale (35.2%, compared with 21.6%, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: The ability of the CTRS-R to predict whether clinically referred children reach DSM-IV criteria for ADHD at school is limited.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder with and without obsessive-compulsive behaviours: clinical characteristics, cognitive assessment, and risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of obsessive--compulsive behaviours (OCB) in a clinical sample of children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and to compare ADHD children (with and without OCB) with respect to clinical and cognitive characteristics and risk factors. METHOD: We compared ADHD children (n = 134) with and without OCB, and we compared all ADHD children with a group of normal control subjects (n = 26) on various clinical, cognitive, and inhibitory control measures; neurobiological and psychosocial risk factors; and family histories of psychiatric illness. RESULTS: Clinically significant OCB was identified in 11.2% (15/134) of children with ADHD. Comorbid OCB was associated with significantly increased perfectionism, improved teacher ratings of inattention, and a decreased likelihood of having a first-degree relative with ADHD. Comorbid ADHD and OCB may also be associated with increased oppositional behaviour at home and better inhibitory control, though these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbid OCB is common in clinically referred children with ADHD and is associated with increased impairment relative to ADHD alone. Further, children with ADHD and OCB may develop symptoms as the result of different genetic and environmental risk factors, compared with children with ADHD only.

How can we improve the assessment of safety in child and adolescent psychopharmacology?

OBJECTIVE: To identify approaches to improving methods for assessing tolerability and safety of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. METHOD: Strengths and limitations of current methodology were reviewed and possible alternatives examined. RESULTS: Research on the validity of safety evaluation has been extremely limited. No evidence-based "gold standard" exists. Clinical trials remain the best design to establish causality, but sample size limitations prevent the detection of infrequent, though serious, adverse events. Other designs, such as cohort and case-control studies, and approaches, such as mining of large databases, must be considered. CONCLUSION: The current lack of methodological standardization across studies prevents generalizations and meta-analyses. Because the issues relevant to drug safety are diverse, a variety of methodological approaches and instruments are needed. It is, however, possible to adopt standard basic definitions of adverse events, degree of severity, ascertainment methods, and recording procedures, as a common "core," to which more specific assessment instruments can be added. Systematic empirical testing and validation of safety methodology is needed.