April 3, 2021
If you've ever wondered how experts make treatment recommendations for patients with ADHD, take a look at this ADHD treatment decision tree that my colleagues and I constructed for our "Primer" about ADHD,http://rdcu.be/gYyV.
Although a picture is worth a thousand words, keep in mind that this infographic only gives the bare bones of a complex process. That said, it is telling that one of the first questions an expert asks is if the patient has a comorbid condition that is more severe than ADHD. The general rule is to treat the more severe disorder first and after that condition has been stabilized plan a treatment approach for the other condition. Stimulants are typically the first-line treatment due to their greater efficacy compared with non-stimulants.
When considering any medication treatment for ADHD safety is the first concern, which is why medical contraindications to stimulants, such as cardiovascular issues or concerns about substance abuse, must be considered. For very young children (preschoolers) family behavior therapy is typically used before medication. Clinicians also must deal with personal preferences. Some parents and some adolescents and adults with ADHD simply don't want to take stimulant medications for the disorder. When that happens, clinicians should do their best to educate them about the costs and benefits of stimulant treatment.
If, as is the case for most patients, the doctor takes the stimulant arm of the decision tree, he or she must next decide if methylphenidate or amphetamine is more appropriate. Here there is very little guidance for doctors. Amphetamine compounds are a bit more effective, but can lead to greater side effects. Genetic studies suggest that a person's genetic background provides some information about who will respond well to methylphenidate, but we are not yet able to make very accurate predictions. After choosing the type of stimulant, the doctor must next consider what duration of action is appropriate for each patient.
There is no simple rule here; the choice will depend upon the specific needs of each patient. Many children benefit from longer-acting medications to get them through school, homework, and late afternoon/evening social activities. Likewise for adults. But many patients prefer shorter-acting medications, especially as these can be used to target specific times of day and can also lower the burden of side effects.
For patients taking down the non-stimulant arm of the decision tree, duration is not an issue but the patient and doctor must choose from among two classes of medications norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or alpha-2-agonists. There are not a lot of good data to guide this decision but, again, genetics can be useful in some cases. Regardless of whether the first treatment is a stimulant or a non-stimulant, the patient's response must be closely monitored as there is no guarantee that the first choice of medication will work out well. In some cases, efficacy is low, or adverse events are high. Sometimes this can be fixed by changing the dose, and sometimes a trial of a new medication is indicated.
If you are a parent of a child with ADHD or an adult with ADHD, this trial-and-error approach can be frustrating. But don't lose hope. In the end, most ADHD patients find a dose and a medication that works for them. Last but not least, when medication leads to a partial response, even after adjusting doses and trying different medication types, doctors should consider referring the patient for a non-pharmacologic ADHD treatment.
You can read details about these in my other blogs, but here the main point is to find an evidence-based treatment. For children, the biggest evidence base is for behavioral family therapy. For adults, cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is the best choice. Except for preschoolers, the experts I worked with on this infographic did not recommend these therapies before medication treatment. The reason is that the medications are much more effective, and many non-pharmacologic treatments (such as CBT) have no data indicating they work well in the absence of medication.
Faraone, S.V. et al. (2015) Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder Nat. Rev. Dis.Primers doi:10.1038/nrdp.2015.20. http://rdcu.be/gYyV
Organic farming aims to protect biodiversity, promote animal welfare, and avoid using pesticides and fertilizers made from petrochemicals. Some pesticides are designed to target insects’ nervous systems but can also affect brain development and health in larger animals, including humans.
Many people believe organic food is healthier than conventionally produced food, which might be true for certain foods and health factors. But does eating organic food during pregnancy impact the chances of a child developing ADHD or autism spectrum disorder (ASD)?
In Norway, researchers can use detailed national health records to study these connections on a population-wide level, thanks to the country’s single-payer healthcare system and national registries.
The Norwegian Mother, Father, and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) invites parents to participate voluntarily and has a 41% participation rate. The study includes:
For this research, a team tracked 40,707 mother-child pairs from children born between 2002 and 2009. They used questionnaires to measure how much organic food mothers consumed during pregnancy. ADHD and ASD symptoms in children were assessed using validated rating scales.
The final analysis included:
The researchers adjusted for factors like maternal age, education, previous pregnancies, BMI before pregnancy, smoking and alcohol use during pregnancy, birth year and season, and the child’s sex.
The researchers concluded that eating organic food during pregnancy has no meaningful effect on the likelihood of a child developing ADHD or ASD. They stated, “The results do not indicate any clinically significant protective or harmful effects of eating organic food during pregnancy on symptoms of ADHD and ASD in the offspring. Based on these findings, we do not recommend any specific advice regarding intake of organic food during pregnancy.”
Infertility affects about one in six couples worldwide. To address this, medical experts have developed Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), including In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) with or without Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI).
Some research suggests that children conceived through ART might have higher rates of intellectual disabilities, cerebral palsy, cancer, and neurological issues compared to children conceived naturally. However, studies looking at a possible link between ART and ADHD have produced mixed and conflicting results.
Until now, there hasn’t been a meta-analysis examining the connection between ART and ADHD. A South Korean research team has conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis on this topic. Their final analysis included eight studies with a total of over ten million participants, comprising six cohort studies and two cross-sectional studies.
The research focused on two types of studies:
Both types of studies are observational, meaning they don’t involve controlled experiments and can be influenced by confounding factors. So they can document interesting associations, not causality. The studie were mostly large-scale national studies and used clinical ADHD diagnoses.
The researchers concluded that while there may be a small association between ART and ADHD, the effect is minimal, and the results are influenced by differences in study designs. They advised interpreting these findings with caution, noting, “The limited effect size and inherent heterogeneity underscore the need for cautious interpretation.”
Periodontitis, commonly known as gum disease, is a condition where the gums become inflamed. If untreated, it can cause the gums to pull back from the teeth, exposing their base, which may eventually lead to loose teeth or tooth loss. While this condition mostly affects adults, it’s also common among teens who don’t floss or brush their teeth properly.
Until now, only a few small studies have looked at a possible link between ADHD and gum disease. A team in Taiwan recently conducted a nationwide study to explore this connection.
Taiwan has a universal health insurance program, introduced in 1995, that provides medical care to nearly all (99.7%) residents. The Taiwan National Health Research Database collects and oversees all insurance claims, making it an excellent resource for large-scale studies.
The researchers used the database to identify teens aged 12 to 19 with ADHD (diagnosed by a psychiatrist) who had no history of gum disease between 2001 and 2011. These teens made up the ADHD group. They matched each ADHD participant with four teens who didn’t have ADHD or gum disease, creating a control group. The groups were matched by age, gender, enrollment date, family income, place of residence, and other health conditions (like obesity, diabetes, smoking, depression, and substance use).
All diagnoses of gum disease were confirmed by board-certified dentists.
The study included:
The researchers concluded that teens with ADHD have a higher risk of developing gum disease later on, even after accounting for other risk factors like smoking, diabetes, and depression. They stated, “ADHD is an independent risk factor for developing periodontitis.”
_logo%201.svg)
