Foy Jane Meschan, Earls Marian F
Department of Pediatrics, Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157, USA.
Pediatrics. 2005 Jan;115(1):e97-104. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-0953.
There remain large discrepancies between pediatricians' practice patterns and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines for the assessment and treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Several studies raise additional concerns about access to ADHD treatment for girls, blacks, and poorer individuals. Barriers may occur at multiple levels, including identification and referral by school personnel, parents' help-seeking behavior, diagnosis by the medical provider, treatment decisions, and acceptance of treatment. Such findings confirm the importance of establishing appropriate mechanisms to ensure that children of both genders and all socioeconomic, racial, and ethnic groups receive appropriate assessment and treatment. Publication of the AAP ADHD toolkit provides resources to assist with implementing the ADHD guidelines in clinical practice. These resources address a number of the barriers to office implementation, including unfamiliarity with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria, difficulty identifying comorbidities, and inadequate knowledge of effective coding practices. Also crucial to the success of improved processes within clinical practice is community collaboration in care, particularly collaboration with the educational system. Such collaboration addresses other barriers to good care, such as pressures from parents and schools to prescribe stimulants, cultural biases that may prevent schools from assessing children for ADHD or may prevent families from seeking health care, and inconsistencies in recognition and referral among schools in the same system. Collaboration may also create efficiencies in collection of data and school-physician communications, thereby decreasing physicians' non-face-to-face (and thus nonreimbursable) elements of care. This article describes a process used in Guilford County, North Carolina, to develop a consensus among health care providers, educators, and child advocates regarding the assessment and treatment of children with symptoms of ADHD. The outcome, ie, a community protocol followed by school personnel and community physicians for >10 years, ensures communication and collaboration between educators and physicians in the assessment and treatment of children with symptoms of ADHD. This protocol has the potential to increase practice efficiency, improve practice standards for children with ADHD, and enhance identification of children in schools. Perhaps most importantly, the community process through which the protocol was developed and implemented has an educational component that increases the knowledge of school personnel about ADHD and its treatment, increasing the likelihood that referrals will be appropriate and increasing the likelihood that children will benefit from coordination of interventions among school personnel, physicians, and parents. The protocol reflects a consensus of school personnel and community health care providers regarding the following: (1) ideal ADHD assessment and management principles; (2) a common entry point (a team) at schools for children needing assessment because of inattention and classroom behavior problems, whether the problems present first to a medical provider, the behavioral health system, or the school; (3) a protocol followed by the school system, recognizing the schools' resource limitations but meeting the needs of community health care providers for classroom observations, psychoeducational testing, parent and teacher behavior rating scales, and functional assessment; (4) a packet of information about each child who is determined to need medical assessment; (5) a contact person or team at each physician's office to receive the packet from the school and direct it to the appropriate clinician; (6) an assessment process that investigates comorbidities and applies appropriate diagnostic criteria; (7) evidence-based interventions; (8) processes for follow-up monitoring of children after establishment of a treatment plan; (9) roles for central participants (school personnel, physicians, school nurses, and mental health professionals) in assessment, management, and follow-up monitoring of children with attention problems; (10) forms for collecting and exchanging information at every step; (11) processes and key contacts for flow of communication at every step; and (12) a plan for educating school and health care professionals about the new processes. A replication of the community process, initiated in Forsyth County, North Carolina, in 2001, offers insights into the role of the AAP ADHD guidelines in facilitating development of a community consensus protocol. This replication also draws attention to identification and referral barriers at the school level. The following recommendations, drawn from the 2 community processes, describe a role for physicians in the collaborative community care of children with symptoms of ADHD. (1) Achieve consensus with the school system regarding the role of school personnel in collecting data for children with learning and behavior problems; components to consider include (a) vision and hearing screening, (b) school/academic histories, (c) classroom observation by a counselor, (d) parent and teacher behavior rating scales (eg, Vanderbilt, Conner, or Achenbach scales), (e) consideration of speech/language evaluation, (f) screening intelligence testing, (g) screening achievement testing, (h) full intelligence and achievement testing if discrepancies are apparent in abbreviated tests, and (i) trials of classroom interventions. (2) Use pediatric office visits to identify children with academic or behavior problems and symptoms of inattention (history or questionnaire). (3) Refer identified children to the contact person at each child's school, requesting information in accordance with community consensus. (4) Designate a contact person to receive school materials for the practice. (5) Review the packet from the school and incorporate school data into the clinical assessment. (6) Reinforce with the parents and the school the need for multimodal intervention, including academic and study strategies for the classroom and home, in-depth psychologic testing of children whose discrepancies between cognitive level and achievement suggest learning or language disabilities and the need for an individualized educational plan (special education), consideration of the "other health impaired" designation as an alternate route to an individualized educational plan or 504 plan (classroom accommodations), behavior-modification techniques for targeted behavior problems, and medication trials, as indicated. (7) Refer the patient to a mental health professional if the assessment suggests coexisting conditions. (8) Use communication forms to share diagnostic and medication information, recommended interventions, and follow-up plans with the school and the family. (9) Receive requested teacher and parent follow-up reports and make adjustments in therapy as indicated by the child's functioning in targeted areas. (10) Maintain communication with the school and the parents, especially at times of transition (eg, beginning and end of the school year, change of schools, times of family stress, times of change in management, adolescence, and entry into college or the workforce).
儿科医生的诊疗模式与美国儿科学会(AAP)关于注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)儿童评估和治疗的指南之间仍存在很大差异。多项研究引发了对女孩、黑人及贫困个体获得ADHD治疗的更多担忧。障碍可能出现在多个层面,包括学校工作人员的识别和转诊、家长的求助行为、医疗服务提供者的诊断、治疗决策以及对治疗的接受程度。这些发现证实了建立适当机制以确保所有性别、社会经济、种族和族裔群体的儿童都能获得适当评估和治疗的重要性。AAP ADHD工具包的发布提供了资源,以协助在临床实践中实施ADHD指南。这些资源解决了一些办公室实施过程中的障碍,包括对《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》标准不熟悉、难以识别共病以及对有效编码实践的知识不足。临床实践中改善流程的成功还至关重要的是社区护理协作,特别是与教育系统的协作。这种协作解决了优质护理的其他障碍,例如家长和学校要求开具兴奋剂的压力、可能阻止学校对儿童进行ADHD评估或阻止家庭寻求医疗保健的文化偏见,以及同一系统内学校在识别和转诊方面的不一致。协作还可以提高数据收集和学校与医生沟通的效率,从而减少医生护理中无法报销的非面对面环节。本文描述了北卡罗来纳州吉尔福德县用于在医疗服务提供者、教育工作者和儿童权益倡导者之间就ADHD症状儿童的评估和治疗达成共识的过程。结果,即学校工作人员和社区医生遵循了10多年的社区协议,确保了教育工作者和医生在ADHD症状儿童评估和治疗中的沟通与协作。该协议有可能提高实践效率、改善ADHD儿童的实践标准,并增强学校中儿童的识别率。也许最重要的是,制定和实施该协议的社区过程具有教育成分,可增加学校工作人员对ADHD及其治疗的了解,提高转诊适当性的可能性,并增加儿童从学校工作人员、医生和家长之间的干预协调中受益的可能性。该协议反映了学校工作人员和社区医疗服务提供者在以下方面的共识:(1)理想的ADHD评估和管理原则;(2)学校中因注意力不集中和课堂行为问题需要评估的儿童的共同切入点(一个团队),无论问题首先出现在医疗服务提供者、行为健康系统还是学校;(3)学校系统遵循的协议,认识到学校的资源限制,但满足社区医疗服务提供者对课堂观察、心理教育测试、家长和教师行为评定量表以及功能评估的需求;(4)关于每个被确定需要进行医学评估的儿童的一包信息;(5)每个医生办公室的联系人或团队,以接收来自学校的包裹并将其转交给适当的临床医生;(6)调查共病并应用适当诊断标准的评估过程;(7)基于证据的干预措施;(8)制定治疗计划后对儿童进行后续监测的过程;(9)核心参与者(学校工作人员、医生、学校护士和心理健康专业人员)在注意力问题儿童评估、管理和后续监测中的角色;(10)每个步骤收集和交换信息的表格;(11)每个步骤沟通流程和关键联系人;(12)对学校和医疗保健专业人员进行新流程教育的计划。2001年在北卡罗来纳州福赛斯县启动的社区过程的复制,为了解AAP ADHD指南在促进社区共识协议制定中的作用提供了见解。这种复制还提请人们注意学校层面的识别和转诊障碍。从这两个社区过程中得出的以下建议描述了医生在ADHD症状儿童的社区协作护理中的角色。(1)与学校系统就学校工作人员在为有学习和行为问题的儿童收集数据方面的角色达成共识;要考虑的组成部分包括(a)视力和听力筛查,(b)学校/学业历史,(c)辅导员的课堂观察,(d)家长和教师行为评定量表(例如,范德比尔特、康纳或阿肯巴克量表),(e)考虑言语/语言评估,(f)筛查智力测试,(g)筛查学业成就测试,(h)如果在简略测试中出现差异则进行全面智力和成就测试,以及(i)课堂干预试验。(2)利用儿科门诊就诊来识别有学业或行为问题以及注意力不集中症状(病史或问卷)的儿童。(3)将识别出的儿童转介给每个孩子学校的联系人,按照社区共识要求提供信息。(4)指定一名联系人接收学校为诊所提供的材料。(5)审查学校提供的包裹,并将学校数据纳入临床评估。(6)向家长和学校强调多模式干预的必要性,包括针对课堂和家庭的学业和学习策略、对认知水平和成就之间存在差异表明有学习或语言障碍且需要个性化教育计划(特殊教育)的儿童进行深入心理测试、考虑将“其他健康受损”指定为获得个性化教育计划或504计划(课堂便利措施)的替代途径、针对有针对性行为问题的行为修正技术以及根据需要进行药物试验。(7)如果评估表明存在共存情况,将患者转介给心理健康专业人员。(8)使用沟通表格与学校和家庭分享诊断和用药信息、推荐的干预措施以及后续计划。(9)接收要求的教师和家长后续报告,并根据孩子在目标领域的功能情况对治疗进行调整。(10)与学校和家长保持沟通,特别是在过渡时期(例如,学年开始和结束时、转学、家庭压力时期、管理变更时期、青春期以及进入大学或工作阶段)。