History of the term attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
Scientists have debated many around changing the term form of this disorder, reflected historical trends in the chemical concept both in terms of the causes and adjustments of the syndrome.
This syndrome has been described in the late 19th-century medicine by the term “insane”, “idiot”, “inferior inhibition” (Thorley, 1984).
In 1902, Still gave a clear description, are more similar to this concept. He described a child with hyperactivity, unable to concentrate, have difficulties in learning and conduct problems. He said to the child that is having a lack of ability to control morality. He said that the baby always getting higher and due to both environmental and physical causes.
Then there’s the look the syndrome comes from the body. This, in part due to the flu pandemic after World War I and a lethargic encephalitis occurs as a sequelae, children who survive the coma to form the manifestation of severe behavior disorders, similar to those described by Stick and is considered “being organic control” (Kahn and Cohen, 1934) in the UK. Lewin (1938) has created attention, when he described the relationship between the serious brain damage and condition of restless, restless in the people slowly wise, as well as in the research on animals in the laboratory. Finally, the hypothesis causes the body to be Strauss and American colleagues insisted, when he described some of the older slower better and hyperactivity; thinking, rushing, lack of persistence and poor awareness. He considered the older smart delay is caused by brain damage, even prove to be a cerebral coma. Strauss call these children suffer from “slight brain damage syndrome”.
Some clinical home at the same time recognize the meandering arguments imply that a child should not be attributed to brain damage because of the behaviour of it, unless this damage has been demonstrated. In an effort to mediate between an idea that some sexual harassment does not do real damage in a child’s brain in the present and the idea regarded the environment is the cause (the idea that the child’s difficulties were due to his parents).
Clement and Peter (1962) coined the term “minimal brain dysfunction – MBD,” the term is widespread and accepted. However, at the International Conference held in Oxford; 1962, Mc Keith gave a word of caution in his essay titled “the mild brain damage – an outdated concept” (1963), Mc. Keith warned that: “the term MBD, real progress over the old term” including heterogeneous group of young ones should be broken in the future. Even so, the term MBD was still being used despite the criticism is too comprehensive.
The effort to create the sort of reliable and effective than starting with ICD-99 (the WHO, 1965) and DSM II (APA, 1968) when the term was changed is the hyperkinetic syndrome of childhood. In the UK, the term is still spoken (follows quickly abolished in ICD-10) and refers to a type of relatively rare disorder: hyperactivity and not paying attention.
Children slowly wise; or older have brain damage was diagnosed in this group, but unlike in the United States, the disorders of conduct, even if at the same time occurs, the exclusion of youngsters from the diagnosis. The difference between this diagnosis standard amid makes the comparison of study becomes meaningless.
In previous decades, the work of Puglas (1983) has had a great influence upon the recognition that the fundamental deficiency causes neurological disorders is due not to modify the attention and control inhibition. This deficiency was more fundamental than the restless condition, not alone. DSM-III noticed this new perspective and call back: attention deficit disorder – ADD. The three basic components of the disorder also described symptoms listed, for example, not paying attention, impulses, the restless.
Distinction between the 3 basics of short survival syndrome and the DSM III-R changed to ADHD (again placed the restless, restless even more important). ADHD symptom expression 14 listed in which if there are 8 expressions are already made.
In summary, the clinical investigation of the term emphasizes:
– Erectile dysfunction is known from 100 years ago.
– The change in terminology reflects the changing conception of cause and the main difficulties of the syndrome.