ABSTRACT
Factors associated with continued driving during shelter in place orders have been examined in a community sample of typically developing teen drivers, but not in teens diagnosed with Attention/Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Our objective was to examine psychosocial factors that predicted risky driving during shelter in place orders in teens with ADHD, which is important since teens with ADHD are at particular risk for poor driving outcomes. The present study is also novel in that it uses naturalistic data of risky driving rather than self-report of continued driving. Naturalistic in-car data from 56 ADHD participants (M age = 16.875 years, SD = 0.955;55.400 % were male) enrolled in an on-going study were used in the present study. Teens had an average of 26.915 months (SD = 14.343) of driving experience. Risky driving was defined as experiencing an event exceeding 0.600 g-force during the first month of COVID-19 pandemic shelter in place ordinances in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana, USA. A hierarchical logistic regression with a post-COVID driving event as the dependent variable was conducted. Baseline ratings of ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder (ODD/CD) severity were entered in the first step of the model, while anxiety severity and parent behaviors regarding teen driving safety (monitoring and limit setting) were entered in the second step of the model. The first step of the model reached statistical significance (χ2(2, 54) = 7.577, p =.023), with only greater symptoms of ODD/CD significantly predicting a post-COVID driving event (B = 0.144, p =.020). With each point increase in ODD/CD symptoms, there was a 15.5 % increase in the probability of experiencing a high g-force event during COVID-19 restrictions. The model was no longer significant at step 2 when anxiety severity and parent behaviors were added to the model (χ2(3, 55) = 10.97p =.052). We conclude that ODD/CD symptom severity was the strongest predictor of risky driving during COVID-19 restrictions within a sample of teen drivers with ADHD. Study implications may be beneficial for clinicians who work with families of teens with ADHD;suggestions for strategies mitigating this risk are discussed. These findings also have implications for which teens with ADHD may be less positively impacted by other government mitigation strategies such as Graduated Drivers Licensing (GDL) regulations. © 2022
ABSTRACT
Factors associated with continued driving during shelter in place orders have been examined in a community sample of typically developing teen drivers, but not in teens diagnosed with Attention/Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Our objective was to examine psychosocial factors that predicted risky drivingduring shelter in place orders in teens with ADHD, which is important since teens with ADHD are at particular risk for poor driving outcomes. The present study is also novel in that it uses naturalistic data of risky driving rather than self-report of continued driving. Naturalistic in-car data from 56 ADHD participants (M age =16.875 years,SD= 0.955;55.400% were male) enrolled in an on-going study were used in the present study. Teens had an average of 26.915 months (SD = 14.343) of driving experience. Risky driving was defined as experiencing an event exceeding 0.600 g-force during the first month of COVID-19 pandemic shelter in place ordinances in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana, USA. A hierarchical logistic regression with a post-COVID driving event as the dependent variable was conducted. Baseline ratings of ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder/conduct disorder (ODD/CD) severity were entered in the first step of the model, while anxiety severity and parent behaviors regarding teen driving safety (monitoring and limit setting) were entered in the second step of the model. The first step of the model reached statistical significance (χ2(2, 54) =7.577, p = .023), with only greater symptoms of ODD/CD significantly predicting a post-COVID driving event (B = .144, p = .020). With each point increase in ODD/CD symptoms, there was a 15.5% increase in the probability of experiencing a high g-force event during COVID-19 restrictions. The model was no longer significant at step 2 when anxiety severity and parent behaviors were added to the model (χ2(3, 55) =10.97 p = .052).We conclude that ODD/CD symptom severity was the strongest predictor of risky driving during COVID-19 restrictions within a sample of teen drivers with ADHD. Study implications may be beneficial for clinicians who work with families of teenswith ADHD;suggestions for strategies mitigating this risk are discussed. These findings also have implications for which teens with ADHD may be less positively impacted by other government mitigation strategies such as Graduated Drivers Licensing (GDL) regulations.
ABSTRACT
Background: At the beginning of the SARS-CoV2 pandemic the focus of attention was on children and adolescents with chronic lung diseases. Due to a lack of epidemiological data and clinical experience, it was feared that children with respiratory diseases were a risk group for particularly severe courses of COVID-19, as has been reported for adults. Objective: The currently available (epidemiological) data on this patient group are presented as well as a description of our own experiences based on three selected cases. Material and methods: A review of the literature was carried out and three selected case reports and a discussion of current recommendations are presented. Results: The incidence of COVID-19 is significantly lower in children than in adults. Furthermore, the known risk factors in adults cannot be simply transferred to pediatric patients. In the majority of cases, children and adolescents with chronic lung diseases show a milder course of SARS-CoV2 infections. Conclusion: Although the hitherto available data show that children and adolescents have a lower risk for COVID-19 courses than adults, it should not be ignored that fatal outcomes have also been reported in pediatric patients. Moreover, late effects, such as the pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome (PIMS) can sometimes lead to a fatal outcome. Nevertheless, care must be taken that this vulnerable patient group does not suffer from avoidable negative side effects of restriction and isolation measures. As an example, the no-show behavior in outpatient departments during the lockdown might have led to a relevant undertreatment of underlying chronic health conditions.