Remarkable high frequency of insecure attachment in children with ADHD persists in a three-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Studies have pointed to a complicated and mutual relationship between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and attachment. In an observational follow-up study conducted in 2015 60 children from 7 years to 12 years recently diagnosed with ADHD were included and assessed according to attachment representation showing 85% of the children to be insecurely attached. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the stability of this remarkably high frequency of insecure attachment in the same cohort of children. METHODS: Children previously assessed using the child attachment interview (CAI) when diagnosed with ADHD were contacted three years later for a follow-up CAI assessment. RESULTS: At follow-up, 31 children participated in the CAI-interviews. Since their diagnosis with ADHD, the children had received treatment as usual. The CAI-interviews showed a continued high rate of insecure attachment with 90% of the children classifying as insecurely attached compared to expected 38% in the normal population. Of these, the majority of children (77%) were classified as dismissing. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that targeting ADHD-symptoms with our current treatment strategies does not in itself improve attachment security. Attachment security may in turn be a factor of importance when evaluating general functioning and prognosis.

Mothers of Children Diagnosed with ADHD: A Descriptive Study of Maternal Experience during the First Three Years of Treatment.

Background: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is the most common childhood psychiatric disorder. Current treatment strategies do not provide a convincing improvement on overall functioning, and further, reciprocity between ADHD and attachment has been suggested. This suggests that we do not fully comprehend the mechanisms of the disorder. This study was part of a larger project investigating factors of potential importance when a child is diagnosed with ADHD. Aim: In this current study we aimed to gain a clearer understanding about whether the mothers experienced the diagnostic process and treatment as helpful. Method: Sixty children newly diagnosed with ADHD and their mothers were included three years prior to this study. Fifty-two (87%) completed a survey about their experience with the diagnostic process and the years after in the psychiatric system and the secondary healthcare sector. Forty-three had also participated in an attachment interview in the original study and answered questions about this. Discussion: The follow-up questionnaire was based on conversations with the mothers was not meant to be used as a quantitative measure. However, one point to take is that the mothers did often not feel the help offered to be sufficient. In our opinion, this underlines that we are still far from understanding what ADHD is and what causes the differences in developmental trajectories as well as how differences in etiological factors may call for more customized approaches in treatment strategies.

Individual participant data systematic reviews with meta-analyses of psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder.

INTRODUCTION: The heterogeneity in people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and the range of specialised psychotherapies means that people with certain BPD characteristics might benefit more or less from different types of psychotherapy. Identifying moderating characteristics of individuals is a key to refine and tailor standard treatments so they match the specificities of the individual participant. The objective of this is to improve the quality of care and the individual outcomes. We will do so by performing three systematic reviews with meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD). The aim of these reviews is to investigate potential predictors and moderating patient characteristics on treatment outcomes for patients with BPD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We performed comprehensive searches in 22 databases and trial registries up to October 6th 2020. These will be updated with a top-up search up until June 2021. Our primary meta-analytic method will be the one-stage random-effects approach. To identify predictors, we will use the one-stage model that accounts for interaction between covariates and treatment allocation. Heterogeneity in case-mix will be assessed with a membership model based on a multinomial logistic regression where study membership is the outcome. A random-effects meta-analysis is chosen to account for expected levels of heterogeneity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The statistical analyses will be conducted on anonymised data that have already been approved by the respective ethical committees that originally assessed the included trials. The three IPD reviews will be published in high-impact factor journals and their results will be presented at international conferences and national seminars. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021210688.