الفهرس 
Review of LiteratureOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 272 |  |  |
| | | from | 272 | | |
Abstract
-184—
Conclusion
Diagnssis and classification may praperly be used to describle disorders, traits or situations, but they should not be used to label people as people. This may seem a minor quibble, but the distinction is important both because of the need to empharize that inctividuals have many different characterictics (each of which may be classified) and emphasize that children change and develop a lables are useful to indicate the current sit-uations but it chould never be assumed that same will apply some years later.Classification provides a very convenient short hand description essential for commun-ication about groups , but it in adequate as means of discussing the difficulties of an individual child.
Much further work is required to develop a realy satisfactory system of classification for child psych-iatric disorders. However, there is already ample evid-ence to indicate practical, valid and clinically useful differentiation between the dozen or so principal cat-egories for clinical psychiatric syndromes and between the main subdivisions for mental retardation. There are also indication that multiaxial framework is likely to
prove to be the most satisfactory scheme for classification.
Generally speaking we can say that child psychiatry may have left its infancy and progressed into childhood,
-185—
but full maturity has not get been reached. This is reflected in its classification schemes. While there is general agreement on the types of categilry child psych-iatrist went to see in such a scheme, this is based lar-gely on observation and clinical expericence rather than than on research and empirical efforts. This results
in a major problem around the real validity of many of the categories as apposed to theft’ face value.
As mentioned before classification is of central importance to a speciality. We need a generally agreed classification scheme, however crude in order to book at the problems of classification and improve our diag-nostic criteria, the system itself and from increase the usefullness of what we can offer children and their
- families. The schemes discussed provide a good basis for such developments.
Some of the maindifferences between the various schemes are summarized in the following:
-186-
1. Conduct disorders in childhood:
These disorders are discussed in DMP.T. under the heading ” Behaviour disorders of childhood” and are defined as disorders occuring in childhood that are more stable and resistant to treatment than transient reactive of situat-ional disturbances and less resistant to treatment then psychosis, neurosis and personality disorders. Character-istic manifestalions of their group include such symptoms as overactivity, inattentiveness, shyness, feelings of rejection, over aggressiveness, timidity and delinquency.
Other conditions which show disorder of behaviour such as speech disturbance, tic, psychomotor disorder, disorders of sleep, feeding and sphincteric disorders are not included under this category and are classified under ” Specid symptoms not elsewhere classified.
In ICD-9 the disorders involving aggressive anddest-ructive behaviour and involving delinquency are not consi-dered part of other psychiatric disorder as it is the abno-rmal behaviour which gives rise to social disapproval.
In DSM III, a more detatied classification is applied for conduct disorders including conduct disorders, disorders of impulse control (pathological gambling, Kleptomania, pyromania), intermittent explosive disorder, isolated explo-sive disorder and atypical impulse controldisorder. (Shaheen, 1984).
-187-
2. Emotional disorders in childhood:
Emotional and conduct disorders ane referred to under the same category in DPM.I.
In ICD-9 distmbonces of emotions include:-
(1)Anxiety and fearfulness.
(2)Misery and unhapiness.
(3)Sensitivity, shyness and secial withdraval.
(4)Relationship problems.
DSM-III supplied further subacategories including reactive attachmentalisorder of infancy, schizoid disorder, elective mutism, oppositional disorder and identity disorder.
3. Psychoses with origin specific to childhood:
Infantile outism is included as a subcategory in both ICD-9 and DSM-III. However, the ICD-9 category ” disinteg-rative psychosis” is not included on the concept that it is apparently a non-specific organic brain syndrome that cons-ists of dementia plus other behavioural abnormalities. In DPM-I, this category is not mentioned, but such cases can find a place under other categories according to the concept the psychiatrist holds.
Conchision.
Various classifications have been proposed for psychi-atric disorders in childhood. The commonest three classifi-cations referred to in Egypt are ICD-9, DSM-III and DMP-I.
-188-
ICD-9 included categories for conduct disorder, emot-ional disturbances, hyperkinetic syndrome, specific delays in development, psychic factors associated with diseases classified elsewhere, and mental retardation.
DSM-III substituted Attention deficit disorders ” for the hyperkinetic syndrawe of ICD-9.
DMP.I showed some important differences:
Some of the conduct disorders of childhood are included under a sperate category: CharacUr trait disorder. There is no specific category for psychoses inchildhood Some conditions prevailing in childhood e.g. tic and psychomotor disorder, disorder of sleep, feeding and sphincteric disorders are classified under ” special symptems or syrdremes not elsewhere classified”. These conditions might deserve a special subecategory under
childhood disorders.
Distsarbances of emotion are included under Behaviour disorders while it may be more apmopriate if they are classifices in a seperate entity.
The DlftP.I. was issued in 1974, and now a more detailed classification may be needed to satisfy the requirements of clinical research in child psychiatry.
•