No abstract

Study Objectives To ascertain the presence of cognitive and attention problems in treatment naïve children with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and to explore whether children recently diagnosed with NT1 improve with respect to cognition and attention problems 1 year after regular treatment for NT1. Methods A total of 15 treatment naïve children (7–15 years) with recently diagnosed NT1 were recruited from three sleep medicine centers in the Netherlands. The control group consisted of 15 healthy children, being frequency matched on age and gender. Both groups were investigated at baseline to examine intelligence profile (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children [WISC] III), attention problems, and processing speed (Bourdon Vos and sustained attention to respond task [SART]). These tests were repeated in children with NT1 1 year after regular (behavioral and medication) treatment for NT1. Results Children with NT1 scored significantly lower on the verbal scale and processing speed subscale of the WISC III, showed more fluctuations in reaction time of the Bourdon Vos and made more mistakes during the SART than the healthy control group at baseline. Children with NT1 significantly improved on total IQ score, and on the WISC indices processing speed, and perceptual organization 1 year after treatment. At follow-up, test scores of treated children were largely comparable to those of the control group at baseline. Conclusions Children with NT1 show improvement in several cognitive domains 1 year after start of treatment. Our findings stress the need for early detection and treatment of narcolepsy in childhood.

Objective: To assess problems faced by children with type 1 narcolepsy (NT1) at school and obtain insight into potential interventions for these problems. Methods: We recruited children and adolescents with NT1 from three Dutch sleep-wake centers. Children, parents, and teachers completed questionnaires about school functioning, interventions in the classroom, global functioning (DISABKIDS), and depressive symptoms (CDI). Results: Eighteen children (7–12 years) and thirty-seven adolescents (13–19 years) with NT1 were recruited. Teachers’ most frequently reported school problems were concentration problems and fatigue (reported by about 60% in both children and adolescents). The most common arrangements at school were, for children, discussing school excursions (68%) and taking a nap at school (50%) and, for adolescents, a place to nap at school (75%) and discussing school excursions (71%). Regular naps at home on the weekend (children 71% and adolescents 73%) were more common than regular naps at school (children 24% and adolescents 59%). Only a minority of individuals used other interventions. School support by specialized school workers was associated with significantly more classroom interventions (3.5 versus 1.0 in children and 5.2 versus 4.1 in adolescents) and napping at school, but not with better global functioning, lower depressive symptom levels, or napping during the weekends. Conclusions: Children with NT1 have various problems at school, even after medical treatment. Interventions to help children with NT1 within the classroom do not seem to be fully implemented. School support was associated with the higher implementation of these interventions. Longitudinal studies are warranted to examine how interventions can be better implemented within the school.