Faculty Bibliography

Initial moderator analyses in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA) suggested that child anxiety ascertained by parent report on the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children 2.3 (DISC Anxiety) differentially moderated the outcome of treatment. Left unanswered were questions regarding the nature of DISC Anxiety, the impact of comorbid conduct problems on the moderating effect of DISC Anxiety, and the clinical significance of DISC Anxiety as a moderator of treatment outcome. Thirty-three percent of MTA subjects met DSM-III-R criteria for an anxiety disorder excluding simple phobias. Of these, two-thirds also met DSM-III-R criteria for comorbid oppositional-defiant or conduct disorder whereas one-third did not, yielding an odds ratio of approximately two for DISC Anxiety, given conduct problems. In this context, exploratory analyses of baseline data suggest that DISC Anxiety may reflect parental attributions regarding child negative affectivity and associated behavior problems (unlike fearfulness), particularly in the area of social interactions, another core component of anxiety that is more typically associated with phobic symptoms. Analyses using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) indicate that the moderating effect of DISC Anxiety continues to favor the inclusion of psychosocial treatment for anxious ADHD children irrespective of the presence or absence of comorbid conduct problems. This effect, which is clinically meaningful, is confined primarily to parent-reported outcomes involving disruptive behavior, internalizing symptoms, and inattention; and is generally stronger for combined than unimodal treatment. Contravening earlier studies, no adverse effect of anxiety on medication response for core ADHD or other outcomes in anxious or nonanxious ADHD children was demonstrated. When treating ADHD, it is important to search for comorbid anxiety and negative affectivity and to adjust treatment strategies accordingly

The Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the MTA, is the first multisite, cooperative agreement treatment study of children, and the largest psychiatric/psychological treatment trial ever conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health. It examines the effectiveness of Medication vs. Psychosocial treatment vs. their combination for treatment of ADHD and compares these experimental arms to each other and to routine community care. In a parallel group design, 579 (male and female) ADHD children, aged 7-9 years, 11 months, were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental arms, and then received 14 months of prescribed treatment (or community care) with periodic reassessments. After delineating the theoretical and empirical rationales for Psychosocial treatment of ADHD, we describe the MTA's Psychosocial Treatment strategy applied to all children in two of the four experimental arms (Psychosocial treatment alone; Combined treatment). Psychosocial treatment consisted of three major components: a Parent Training component, a two-part School Intervention component, and a child treatment component anchored in an intensive Summer Treatment Program. Components were selected based on evidence of treatment efficacy and because they address comprehensive symptom targets, settings, comorbidities, and functional domains. We delineate key conceptual and logistical issues faced by clinical researchers in design and implementation of Psychosocial research with examples of how these issues were addressed in the MTA study

Background: Previous studies have demonstrated the short-term efficacy of pharmacotherapy and behavior therapy for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but no longer-term tie, >4 months) investigations have compared these 2 treatments or their combination. Methods: A group of 579 children with ADHD Combined Type, aged 7 to 9.9 years, were assigned to 13 months of medication management (titration followed by monthly visits); intensive behavioral treatment (parent, school, and child components, with therapist involvement gradually reduced over time); the two combined; or standard community care (treatments by community providers). Outcomes were assessed in multiple domains before and during treatment and at treatment end point (with the combined treatment and medication management groups continuing medication at all assessment points). Data were analyzed through intent to-treat random-effects regression procedures. Results: All 4 groups showed sizable reductions in symptoms over time, with significant differences among them in degrees of change. For most ADHD symptoms, children in the combined treatment and medication management groups showed significantly greater improvement than those given intensive behavioral treatment and community care. Combined and medication management treatments did not differ significantly on any direct comparisons, but in several instances (oppositional/aggressive symptoms, internalizing symptoms, teacher-rated social skills, parent-child relations, and reading achievement) combined treatment proved superior to intensive behavioral treatment and/or community care while medication management did not. Study medication strategies were superior to community care treatments, despite the fact that two thirds of community-treated subjects received medication during the study period. Conclusions: For ADHD symptoms, our carefully crafted medication management was superior to behavioral treatment and to routine community care that included medication. Our combined treatment did not yield significantly greater benefits than medication management for core ADHD symptoms, but may have provided modest advantages for non-ADHD symptom and positive functioning outcomes

Background: Intent-to-treat analyses of the study revealed that medication management, alone or combined with intensive behavioral treatment, was superior to behavioral treatment and community care in reducing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms; but only combined treatment showed consistently greater benefit than community care across other outcome domains (disruptive and internalizing symptoms, achievement, parent-child relations and social skills). We examine response patterns in subgroups defined by baseline variables (moderators) or variables related to treatment implementation (mediators). Methods: We reconducted random-effects regression (RR) analyses, adding factors defined by moderators (ses, prior medication use, comorbid disruptive or anxiety disorder, and public assistance) and a mediator (treatment acceptance/attendance). Results: Study outcomes (N = 579) were upheld in most moderator subgroups (boys and girls, children with and without prior medication, children with and without co-morbid disruptive disorders). Comorbid anxiety disorder did moderate outcome. in participants without anxiety, results paralleled intent-to-treat findings. For those with anxiety disorders, however, behavioral treatment yielded significantly better outcomes than community care (and was no longer statistically different from medication management and combined treatment) regarding ADHD-related and internalizing symptoms. In families receiving public assistance, medication management yielded decreased closeness in parent-child interactions, and combined treatment yielded relatively greater benefits for teacher-reported social skills. In families with high treatment acceptance/attendance, intent-to-treat results were upheld. Acceptance/attendance was particularly important for medication treatments. Finally, two thirds of children given community care received stimulants. Behavioral treatment did not significantly differ from, but medication management was superior to, this subgroup. Conclusions: Exploratory analyses revealed that our study (the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder [MTA]) re suits were confirmed across most baseline variables and treatment acceptance/attendance. Tn children with ADHD plus anxiety, behavioral treatment surpassed community. care and approached medication-based treatments regarding parent-reported ADHD symptoms

OBJECTIVE: To review the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of stimulants for the treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: A Medline search was conducted for both randomized controlled trials and reviews to determine the efficacy and safety of stimulant drugs for treating children with ADHD. Information was obtained on adverse events associated with their use, including their impact on height and weight gain during childhood. Animal data were reviewed for information on tolerance, sensitization, and the impact of high-dose stimulant effects on neurons and on the development of hepatic tumors. Human data on dopamine transporter occupancy by stimulants were also included. RESULTS: Stimulant treatment studies show robust short-term efficacy and a good safety profile. Longer-term studies are few in number but have produced no conclusive evidence that careful therapeutic use of these medications is harmful. CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that stimulants show efficacy and safety in studies lasting up to 24 months

Examined factors that influence teachers' ratings of children with either attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). 105 teachers watched 2 videotapes--1 depicting a normal child and the other a child with either ADHD or ODD--and rated each child using 2 different questionnaires. Results indicated that teachers accurately rated the child on the ADHD versus ODD tape as having significantly more inattention and hyperactivity but significantly less oppositionality. However, effect sizes indicated the presence of a unidirectional, negative halo effect of oppositional behaviors on ratings of hyperactivity and inattention. Teachers appeared less biased in their judgments when using a well-operationalized rating scale. Finally, knowledge, education, and experience with children with ADHD generally had no effect on the accuracy of teachers' ratings