Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie · 2004
[A study of 100 consecutive children presenting with learning disabilities].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cuvellier J C, Pandit F, Casalis S, Lemaître M P, Cuisset J M, Platof A, Vallée L
Аннотация
DESIGN: To determine the impact of a neuropediatrician view on diagnosis and management of learning disabilities.
METHOD: Retrospective review of the medical records of the last 100 children attending for learning disabilities from 1st June 2000 through 31st May 2001. Assessment concerned school curriculum, type of management before consultation, diagnosis procedure and type of management following consultation. Differential diagnosis was made in 100% of cases following evaluation.
RESULTS: The three main diagnoses were attentionnal deficit disorder with hyperactivity (39%), mental retardation (17%) and dyslexia (7%). Mental retardation and cerebral palsy diagnoses had not been made before consultation. Conversely, 70% of the diagnoses of dyslexia made before consultation were incorrect. Medical treatment was proposed in 38% of cases and modification in the management in 59% of cases.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the interest of a rigorous diagnosis procedure for learning disabilities, based on a neuropediatrics examination, a cognitive evaluation and phonological and lexical evaluation. It only may lead to an appropriate management.
METHOD: Retrospective review of the medical records of the last 100 children attending for learning disabilities from 1st June 2000 through 31st May 2001. Assessment concerned school curriculum, type of management before consultation, diagnosis procedure and type of management following consultation. Differential diagnosis was made in 100% of cases following evaluation.
RESULTS: The three main diagnoses were attentionnal deficit disorder with hyperactivity (39%), mental retardation (17%) and dyslexia (7%). Mental retardation and cerebral palsy diagnoses had not been made before consultation. Conversely, 70% of the diagnoses of dyslexia made before consultation were incorrect. Medical treatment was proposed in 38% of cases and modification in the management in 59% of cases.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the interest of a rigorous diagnosis procedure for learning disabilities, based on a neuropediatrics examination, a cognitive evaluation and phonological and lexical evaluation. It only may lead to an appropriate management.