Is ADHD warning justified? A follow-up clinical practice study in a Spanish sample

Background: ADHD is described as a chronic condition with associated social, academic, and mental risks. The present work analyses the current clinical state, occupation, and daily life interference of children detected with ADHD symptoms in two cohorts (2004 and 2009). Methods 134 clinical subjects with ADHD diagnosis detected in 2004 or 2009, were asked to run voluntary interviews. Ninety-four (94) cases answered questions about their current clinical and occupational statement, symptoms (SNAP-IV), and difficulties (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire). Results 60.70% of the sample has no current treatment. Rates for inattention and hyperactive/impulsivity symptoms subsets went down. A total of 66.2% shows current difficulties but with a moderate interference in their daily life. The working/academic dimension is the most affected sphere in terms of impairment. Conclusions hyperactive/impulsivity subset and global ADHD rates go down as people grow up. Even if patients retain some difficulties, these are not serious enough for forcing them into clinical treatment. Main points in Public Health Significance are the followings: (a) these results question ADHD chronicity and higher risk of mental conditions in adulthood. Hyperactive and impulsivity, inattention, and global ADHD symptoms remain in one-third of the sample after 5 or 10 years after the diagnosis, (b) the higher risk of mental disorders and academic failure should be also questioned as most of the sample did not receive any treatment for a psychological condition after 5 or 10 years of ADHD diagnosis and most of them had a productive occupation at the follow-up moment, (c) ADHD rates are were higher when they are assessed by a relative caregiver. This might be linked with a possible cultural “psychopathologization” of childhood.