Background

Sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) is associated with—but distinct from—attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study examined SCT rates in adult outpatients seeking an ADHD assessment, differences in rates based on ADHD status, impact of assessment method (i.e., reporting source, symptom count, and functional impairment), and age of SCT symptom onset.

Methods

Outpatients (n = 124) completed an SCT measure (n = 120 other-reporters). SCT was based on reporting source (i.e., self-report, other-report, either reporting source [“or” rule], and both reporting sources [“and” rule]), symptom count (i.e., age-based norms at or near the 93rd percentile, and a higher symptom count threshold of five), and functional impairment (i.e., 0, 1, and ≥2 domains).

Results

SCT rates varied based on assessment method for the full sample (26%–82%) and among those with (32%–91%) and without (16%–66%) ADHD. Rates decreased with stricter functional impairment and symptom count criteria. SCT was higher in the ADHD group than the non-ADHD group based on other-reporters and the “or” rule, but not the “and” rule. Functional impairment and symptom count criteria did not impact these comparisons. For self-reported SCT rates, ADHD/non-ADHD group comparisons did not differ based on age-based symptom count threshold, but did with a symptom count threshold of five. Self-reported SCT symptom onset was 13.36 years-old and was significantly younger for the ADHD group (11.69 years) than the non-ADHD group (16.36 years).

Conclusions

Elevated SCT symptoms and related impairment are common among adults seeking an ADHD evaluation. These rates and ADHD/non-ADHD group differences vary substantially based on diagnostic methods.

中文翻译：

---

寻求注意力缺陷/多动障碍评估的成人门诊样本中的缓慢认知节奏 (SCT)：发病年龄和评估方法对 SCT 率的影响

背景

缓慢的认知节奏 (SCT) 与注意力缺陷/多动障碍 (ADHD) 相关，但与之不同。该研究检查了寻求 ADHD 评估的成人门诊患者的 SCT 率、基于 ADHD 状态的率差异、评估方法的影响（即报告来源、症状计数和功能障碍）以及 SCT 症状出现的年龄。

方法

门诊患者 ( n  = 124) 完成了 SCT 测量 ( n  = 120 其他报告者)。SCT 基于报告来源（即，自我报告、其他报告、任一报告来源 [“或”规则] 和两个报告来源 [“和”规则]）、症状计数（即，在或接近第 93 个百分位数，以及更高的症状计数阈值 5）和功能障碍（即 0、1 和 ≥2 个域）。

结果

SCT 率因全样本 (26%–82%) 以及 (32%–91%) 和无 (16%–66%) ADHD 的评估方法而异。随着更严格的功能障碍和症状计数标准，发病率下降。根据其他报告者和“或”规则，而不是“和”规则，ADHD 组的 SCT 高于非 ADHD 组。功能障碍和症状计数标准不影响这些比较。对于自我报告的 SCT 率，ADHD/非 ADHD 组的比较没有根据基于年龄的症状计数阈值而有所不同，但在症状计数阈值为 5 时有所不同。自我报告的 SCT 症状发作年龄为 13.36 岁，并且 ADHD 组（11.69 岁）明显比非 ADHD 组（16.36 岁）年轻。

结论

在寻求 ADHD 评估的成年人中，SCT 症状升高和相关损伤很常见。这些比率和 ADHD/非 ADHD 组差异因诊断方法而异。