Context Injury, a leading health threat to children, is also a common cause of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in childhood. Most injured children with PTSD are not diagnosed or treated.Objective To develop a stand-alone screening tool for use by clinicians during acute trauma care to identify injured children and their parents who are at risk of significant, persistent posttraumatic stress symptoms. DesignThe Screening Tool for Early Predictors of PTSD (STEPP) was derived from a 50-item risk factor survey administered within 1 month of injury as part of a prospective cohort study of posttraumatic stress in injured children and their parents. Symptoms of PTSD were assessed at least 3 months after injury.Setting Urban, pediatric level I trauma center.Participants A sample of 269 children aged 8 to 17 years admitted for treatment of traffic-related injuries between July 1999 and October 2001, and one parent per child, completed a risk factor survey assessing potential predictors of PTSD outcome. One hundred seventy-one families (63%) completed a follow-up assessment. Main Outcome MeasuresThe Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for Children and Adolescents and the PTSD Checklist served as criterion standards for child and parent outcomes, respectively. Positive cases were defined as those meeting criteria for at least subsyndromal PTSD with continuing impairment ("persistent traumatic stress"). ResultsThe STEPP contains 4 dichotomous questions asked of the child, 4 asked of one parent, and 4 items obtained easily from the emergency medical record. STEPP sensitivity in predicting posttraumatic stress was 0.88 for children and 0.96 for parents, with negative predictive values of 0.95 for children and 0.99 for parents. The odds ratio for prediction of persistent traumatic stress was 6.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-22.8) in children and 26.6 (95% CI, 3.5-202.1) in parents. ConclusionsThe STEPP represents a new method to guide clinicians in making evidence-based decisions for the allocation of scarce mental health resources for traumatic stress. Its brevity and simple scoring rule suggest that it can be easily administered in the acute care setting.

This educational and device disbursement intervention was effective in improving the home safety practices of caregivers of young children. Moreover, the ED was used effectively to disseminate home injury prevention information.

As many as 45% of patients with major depressive episode also meet DSM-IV criteria for bipolar II (BP II) disorder. Although some clinicians advocate using a mood stabilizer in treating BP II depression, antidepressant monotherapy has been less well studied in this disorder. As part of a prospective, placebo-controlled, relapse-prevention study in 839 patients, the efficacy and safety of short- and long-term fluoxetine treatment in patients with BP II major depression compared with patients with unipolar (UP) major depression was retrospectively examined. Eighty-nine BP II patients (mean age, 41+/-11 years) were compared with 89 age- and gender-matched UP patients and with 661 unmatched UP patients (mean age, 39+/-11 years). All received short-term fluoxetine therapy at 20 mg daily for up to 12 weeks. Complete remission was defined as a final Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score < or = 7 by week 9 that was then maintained for 3 additional weeks. Remitted patients were then randomly assigned to receive double-blind treatment with one of the following: (1) fluoxetine 20 mg daily for 52 weeks; (2) fluoxetine for 38 weeks, then placebo for 14 weeks; (3) fluoxetine for 14 weeks, then placebo for 38 weeks; or (4) placebo for 52 weeks. Antidepressant efficacy was similar in BP and UP patients during short-term therapy. Discontinuation for lack of efficacy was lower in BP II (5%) than in UP (12%) patients (p = not significant [NS]), whereas dropouts for adverse events were similar in BP II (11%) and UP (9%) patients. During long-term relapse-prevention therapy, relapse rates were similar in BP II and UP patients (p = NS). During short-term fluoxetine therapy, three BP II (3.8%) versus no matched UP (p = NS) and 0.3% unmatched UP (p = 0.01) patients had a "manic switch." During long-term fluoxetine therapy, one (2%) BP II and three (1%) unmatched UP patients (one taking placebo) had a manic switch (p = NS). In conclusion, fluoxetine may be a safe and effective antidepressant monotherapy for the short-term treatment of BP II depression with a relatively low manic switch rate. Fluoxetine may also be effective in relapse-prevention therapy in patients with BP II disorder.

No abstract

Adolescents generally understand the danger of intoxicated driving. However, some groups need to better recognize this hazard. Distractions take teenagers' focus off the road, but not all are viewed as hazardous. Although inexperience is the key factor that interacts with other conditions to cause crashes, adolescents do not recognize what merits experience. Future research is needed to explore how to help teens become safer drivers and how to make clinicians, families, and communities more effective in setting, promoting, and monitoring safety standards.

No abstract

Management of benzodiazepine discontinuation can be facilitated significantly by co-prescribing imipramine before and during the benzodiazepine taper. Daily benzodiazepine dose, severity of baseline symptoms of anxiety and depression, and duration of benzodiazepine use were additional significant predictors of successful taper outcome.

A previous report suggested that 5 weeks of continued treatment with 20 mg of fluoxetine was approximately as effective as double-blind titration to a dose of 60 mg in patients who had failed to respond to 3 weeks of initial treatment at 20 mg. The current study was undertaken to evaluate whether 150 mg of sertraline was any more effective than 50 mg in treating depressed patients who were non-responders at 3 weeks. Ninety-one outpatients with DSM-IV major depressive disorder who had a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score > or = 18 were treated with open label sertraline for 3 weeks. Patients who did not achieve remission (defined as 17-item HAM-D total score < or = 8 by week 3) were then randomized to 5 more weeks of double-blind treatment with either 50 mg of sertraline or immediate titration to 150 mg of sertraline. Efficacy was assessed at each visit with the HAM-D, Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-severity and improvement scale, and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist. There were no significant between-group differences in clinical or demographic features at baseline for the three treatment groups. After 3 weeks of open-label treatment, 16 patients were not randomized, of whom 11 (69%) met responder criteria. The remaining patients were randomized, double-blind, to 50 mg of sertraline (n = 37; HAM-D = 19.2 +/- 5.0) or 150 mg of sertraline (n = 38; HAM-D = 18.4 +/- 5.0). PROC-Mixed analyses found no significant difference in slopes for any outcome measure when comparing 50 mg and 150 mg sertraline treatment groups. At week 8 (LOCF), the overall remission rate (HAM-D < or = 8) for 3-week non-responders was 40%, with no statistically significant between-group difference for the 50 mg versus 150 mg doses of sertraline (P > 0.10). A completer analysis yielded similar results. Adverse events were mostly mild on both doses of sertraline and led to few treatment discontinuations. The results suggest that for most patients continued treatment with 50 mg dose of sertraline yields a rate of antidepressant response that is comparable to what is achieved by dose escalation from 50 mg to 150 mg of sertraline after 3 weeks of treatment. While some patients clearly benefit from higher doses, the results of the current study are consistent with the lack of any evidence for a dose-response curve with sertraline in the treatment of depression.