A Population-Based Study of the Utility of Screening for Tics and the Relative Contribution of Tics and Psychiatric Comorbidity to Academic and Social Impairment in Adolescents

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis study examined the performance of a brief screening tool for tics in adolescents. Academic and social impairment in students by tic screen status and emotional/behavioral problem status were examined. Data were collected as part of an epidemiologic study, the Project to Learn about Youth – Mental Health. Participants were 2,312 secondary school students at the Ohio site (47.4% female; 94.4% non-Hispanic white) and their teachers. Students completed 6 items from the Motor tic, Obsessions and compulsions, Vocal tic Evaluation Survey (MOVES-6) and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Teachers completed the Proxy Report Questionnaire for tics and SDQ. Based on responses to the MOVES-6, 11.1% of students screened positive for tics. Internal consistency was adequate (α = 0.76); inter-rater consistency between teachers and students was low (0.03). Based on student self-report, those who screened positive for tics self-reported more academic and social impairment than students who screened negative for tics; teacher-report of impairment was similar between those with a positive or negative tic screen. Students who screened positive for tics and reported internalizing difficulties reported more academic and social impairment than students with only a positive tic screen. Teachers perceived those screening positive for tics and externalizing difficulties as the most socially impaired. In conclusion, a positive self-reported tic screen was associated with self-reported academic and social impairment. Findings reveal the independent contribution of tics to impairment, even when internalizing and externalizing problems are present, and the potential utility of a school-based screening for tics in adolescents. Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThe data presented in this article were obtained in a project supported by the Disability Research and Dissemination Center (DRDC) through its Grant Number [5U01DD001007-03] from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The contents of the article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the DRDC or the CDC.