Journal of Child and Adolescent Behavior
Open Access

Mental health diseases; Depression; Anxiety

Introduction

A typical diurnal life involves carrying out a variety of movements. Movements can be divided into those taking use of tools and those that do not. Food medication and housework are exemplifications of the former, frequently taking the use of kitchen tools and home appliances. Dressing, sanctification and grooming bearmulti-step successional conduct and at times, fine movements of the upper branch. Dispensable to say, the capability to perform similar conduct essential to diurnal living is integral to one’s functional independence.

Praxis is defined as the capability to perform similar professed or learned movements. Apraxia refers to the incapability to carry out similar praxis movements in the absence of abecedarian motor, sensitive or collaboration poverties that could serve as the primary cause. Apraxia can be farther classified into subtypes similar as ide motor, theoretical and branch-kinetic apraxia. This miracle is seen in a variety of neurological diseases similar as madness, stroke and Parkinsonism. Prior to the advance in neurophysiology, knowledge on praxis or apraxia reckoned on clinical compliances of mortal subjects. With recent advances in operations of these styles including non-invasive brain stimulation, knowledge on the subject of apraxia has expanded. Similar sapience may veritably probably open up possibilities for the use of neuromodulator as a way to treat this complaint, in confluence with motor training that has also been tried as treatment. I aim to give an overview of apraxia with an emphasis on the neurophysiology involving colourful brain regions that appear to contribute to mortal action [1-3].

Discussion

Ideomotor apraxia is a subtype of apraxia that’s generally seen in cases with stroke or neurodegenerative diseases. It’s defined as a complaint of gesture performance upon verbal command, despite having complete knowledge of tasks. For illustration, the case might be suitable to describe how to use a ladle, but not suitable to demonstrate the factual use. This generally results in the case failing to shrug a transitive act (Show me how you would use a screwdriver). Theoretical apraxia, on the other hand, is characterized by incapability to conceptualize a task, despite complete identification of the tools. When presented with a stamp and an envelope, one might be suitable to name the objects, but unfit to demonstrate how to post an envelope using those objects. In this situation, the monitor finds that the case is unfit to rightly sequence a series of conduct needed in a specific type of exertion. branch-kinetic apraxia is another major subtype of apraxia that indicates the loss of the capability to make precise, independent but coordinated cutlet and hand movements, performing in inaccurate or clumsy movements.9 exemplifications of tasks taking fine motor performance including buttoning or coin gyration, the ultimate of which has been proposed as a test of motor dexterity [4].

Exemplifications of task-specific apraxia include dressing or sitting apraxia, apraxia of eyelid opening and gait apraxia. Apraxia of eyelid opening and apraxia of gait are now more rigorously considered to be diseases misclassified as apraxia. Apraxia of eyelid opening is characterized as difficulty with voluntary eye opening. One can test for this by having the case freely close their eyes, and open presently when the monitor shouts “open!” The case with apraxia of eyelid opening won’t be suitable to open the eyes incontinently. This complaint can be misdiagnosed as focal eye dystonia or blepharospasm, conditions where there’s forceful eye check. Apraxia of gait is a kindly nonspecific term frequently used to relate to colourful gait patterns, including gait ignition failure and freezing of gait. The pathophysiology of these diseases isn’t well understood, although some studies have set up brain regions applicable in other types of apraxia to be involved in apraxia of eyelid opening, suggesting that these diseases may partake common neural systems [5].

Apraxia is seen in colorful neurological diseases, including stroke and neurodegenerative diseases similar as Alzheimer’s complaint, Parkinson’s complaint and atypical Parkinsonism (common exemplifications are corticobasal pattern (CBS); preliminarily nominated corticobasal degeneration or progressive supranuclear paralysis (PSP)). In cases with left hemispheric stroke, apraxia has been reported to be current in roughly one- third of this population. In clinical practice, it isn’t uncommon that further than one type of apraxia is present in a single affected case [6].

Despite the fairly straightforward recognition of apraxia, there’s no extensively- used, standardized system to estimate for this miracle. To duly identify apraxia, both transitive (movements involving tools) and intransitive (communicative or gestural) movements should be used for evaluation. When crimes and problems with delicacy do, the monitor must precisely dissect the difficulties. Does the case have complete knowledge of tools and objects in terms of their function? Are there problems with focal or distal branch control? Is the patient suitable to carry out the correct sequence of conduct needed for the intended movement? “Body part apraxia” can also be seen in apraxic cases when they’re asked to shrug transitive movements, similar as brushing their hair. In this case, the case will use their hand as a encounter itself, and comb their fritters through their hair. This has been presumed to affect from a loss of internal representation of tools, and fairly complete intransitive representations. Other types of error can do as well, similar as additions, elisions, perseverations, negotiations and lack of a response. Testing of apraxia should be done in both upper branches, as both can be affected. Testing for apraxia in the lower branches and oro- buccal muscles can be revealing as well. The test of oral and branch apraxia (TOLA) is one suitable for evaluation of apraxia affecting those body regions, but has limitations in terms of ignoring performance when seeing or using tools[7-10].

Several testing styles for apraxia have been developed to date, utmost of which are lacking in validity and perceptivity. Utmost scales aren’t quick to use and thus not generally applied in the clinical setting. The De Renzi ideomotor apraxia test is a 24- item scale tested in cases with left or right brain damage, developed for the assessment of ideomotor apraxia. More lately, a comprehensive test nominated the test of upper branch apraxia (TULIA) was developed, which includes non-symbolic (pointless), intransitive (communicative) and transitive (tool- related) gestures. This 48- item test was set up to have good trustability and validity, and a more terse, bedside 12- item test grounded on TULIA was further developed (Apraxia Screen of TULIA; AST), shown to have high particularity and perceptivity S[11-12].

Conclusion

Similar bedside tests may allow for a quick and dependable apraxia assessment, which may be clinically applicable and thus useful for assessing the inflexibility of ide motor apraxia. These apraxia tests include tasks involving reproduction, which can be disturbed in either left or right brain damage. In left brain damage, reproduction of hand postures is frequently disturbed, whereas reproduction of cutlet or bottom postures is disturbed in those with right brain damage. There’s still a need for tests that test other rudiments of praxis, similar as the factual use of tool and selection of the applicable task for a given tool, particularly when having further than one to choose from (for illustration, a cutter to cut chuck can also be used to impale). Formalized testing styles for branch-kinetic apraxia are lacking, in comparison to ide motor apraxia. In addition to having the subject perform buttoning or coin- gyration tasks, branch-kinetic apraxia can be assessed by having one perform a pegboard test. This test is occasionally used in neuropsychological testing, and involves lifting one cut at a time, placing it in a whole, and moving on to the coming cut, repeating this action.

References

1. Schnurr PP, Friedman MJ, Bernardy NC (2002) Research on posttraumatic stress disorder: Epidemiology, pathophysiology, and assessment. J Clin Psychol. 58: 877-889

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref   

2. Kar N (2009) Psychological impact of disasters on children: Review of assessment and interventions. World J. Pediatr. 5: 5-11.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. DiGrande L, Perrin MA, Thorpe LE, Thalji L, Murphy J et al (2008) Posttraumatic stress symptoms, PTSD, and risk factors among lower Manhattan residents 2 ~ 3 years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. J Trauma Stress. 21: 264-273.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Galea S, Ahern J, Resnick H, Kilpatrick D, Bu cuvalas M, Gold J, et al (2002) Psychological sequelae of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City. NEJM. 346: 982-987.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Schlenger WE, Caddell JM, Ebert L, Jordan BK, Rourke KM et al (2002) Psychological reactions to terrorist attacks. JAMA. 288: 581-5881.

Indexed at, Crossref

6. Blader, Joseph C, Kafantaris, Vivian (2007) Pharmacological Treatment of Bipolar Disorder among Children and Adolescents. Expert Rev Neurother 7(3): 259-270.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

7. Raber JH, Wienclaw RA (2012) The Gale Encyclopedia of Mental Health. Lithium Carbonate 1:896-898.
8. Polanczyk, Guilherme V, Salum, Giovanni A, Sugaya Luisa S, et al. (2015) Annual Research Review: A meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence of mental disorders in children and adolescents. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 56 (3): 345-365.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

9. Zubrick, Stephen R, Silburn, Sven R, Burton, et al. (2000) Mental Health Disorders in Children and Young People: Scope, Cause and Prevention. Psychiatry J 34(4): 570-578.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at 

10. Dopheide, Julie A (2006) Recognizing and treating depression in children and adolescents. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 63(3): 233-243.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

11. Casey BJ, Jones RM, Levita L, Libby V, Pattwell SS, et al. (2010) The storm and stress of adolescence: insights from human imaging and mouse genetics. Dev Psychobiol 52: 225-235.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

12. Whittle S, Lichter R, Dennison M, Vijayakumar N, Schwartz O, et al. (2014) Structural brain development and depression onset during adolescence: a prospective longitudinal study. Am J Psychiatry 171: 564-571.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref