注意缺陷/多动症的治疗。

A R Jadad, M Boyle, C Cunningham, M Kim, R Schachar
{"title":"注意缺陷/多动症的治疗。","authors":"A R Jadad,&nbsp;M Boyle,&nbsp;C Cunningham,&nbsp;M Kim,&nbsp;R Schachar","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine (a) the long-term and short-term effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults and (b) whether combined interventions are more effective than individual interventions.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), HEALTHStar (from 1975), PsycINFO (from 1984), EMBASE (from 1984), and the Cochrane Library searches were completed in November 1997. Reference lists of eligible studies and files of members of the research team and partner organizations were also searched.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>Studies were selected if they focused on the treatment of ADHD in humans and were published in any language as a full report in peer-reviewed journals. Studies including conditions other than ADHD were reported if separate subgroup analyses for patients with ADHD were provided.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two reviewers independently extracted data for 41 variables on general characteristics, along with detailed information on interventions, outcomes, and tests. Differences were resolved by consensus or by a third researcher. Studies were not combined quantitatively because the quality of reporting was low and heterogeneity existed across outcome measures and tests.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>Seventy-eight studies (77 randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies compared drugs and showed few, if any, differences among methylphenidate (MPH), dextroamphetamine (DEX), and pemoline; studies comparing stimulants with tricyclic antidepressants (2) were inconclusive. Six studies compared drugs with nondrug interventions and showed consistently that stimulants, particularly MPH, may be more effective than nonpharmacological interventions. Twenty studies compared combination therapies with a stimulant or a nondrug intervention alone; no additional beneficial effects for combination therapies were shown. Nine studies compared tricyclic antidepressants with placebo and showed that desipramine may be more effective than placebo; no consistent effect was shown for imipramine. Fourteen studies (13 in school children and 1 in adults) evaluated long-term therapy (> or = 12 weeks) and showed a trend to general improvement regardless of treatment, but the length of followup was inadequate. MPH may reduce behavioral disturbance in children with ADHD while it is taken. Academic performance does not appear to be improved with stimulants. Twelve studies evaluated treatment in adults with ADHD. For MPH vs. placebo, the results were contradictory. Antidepressants may be effective in adults, but no beneficial effect was seen with pemoline, nicotine, or phenylalanine compared with placebo. Thirty-two reports (29 studies) evaluated adverse effects of drug therapy; many of the side effects associated with stimulant use appear to be relatively mild and of short duration and to respond to dosing or timing adjustments. Data are inadequate on the long-term effects and severity of adverse effects of most interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This report describes rigorous systematic reviews on the treatment of ADHD, ready for incorporation into evidence-based clinical practice guidelines or performance measures. The report also provides a detailed description of the many limitations of the evidence available and provides recommendations to fill existing knowledge gaps. Studies on ADHD have low reporting quality, methodological flaws, and heterogeneity across outcome measures and tests. A detailed description is included of the many limitations of the available evidence plus recommendations to fill existing knowledge gaps. Fulfilling such knowledge gaps will not be easy and will require genuine collaboration among decisionmakers.</p>","PeriodicalId":79883,"journal":{"name":"Evidence report/technology assessment (Summary)","volume":" 11","pages":"i-viii, 1-341"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4782276/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.\",\"authors\":\"A R Jadad,&nbsp;M Boyle,&nbsp;C Cunningham,&nbsp;M Kim,&nbsp;R Schachar\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine (a) the long-term and short-term effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults and (b) whether combined interventions are more effective than individual interventions.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), HEALTHStar (from 1975), PsycINFO (from 1984), EMBASE (from 1984), and the Cochrane Library searches were completed in November 1997. Reference lists of eligible studies and files of members of the research team and partner organizations were also searched.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>Studies were selected if they focused on the treatment of ADHD in humans and were published in any language as a full report in peer-reviewed journals. Studies including conditions other than ADHD were reported if separate subgroup analyses for patients with ADHD were provided.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two reviewers independently extracted data for 41 variables on general characteristics, along with detailed information on interventions, outcomes, and tests. Differences were resolved by consensus or by a third researcher. Studies were not combined quantitatively because the quality of reporting was low and heterogeneity existed across outcome measures and tests.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>Seventy-eight studies (77 randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies compared drugs and showed few, if any, differences among methylphenidate (MPH), dextroamphetamine (DEX), and pemoline; studies comparing stimulants with tricyclic antidepressants (2) were inconclusive. Six studies compared drugs with nondrug interventions and showed consistently that stimulants, particularly MPH, may be more effective than nonpharmacological interventions. Twenty studies compared combination therapies with a stimulant or a nondrug intervention alone; no additional beneficial effects for combination therapies were shown. Nine studies compared tricyclic antidepressants with placebo and showed that desipramine may be more effective than placebo; no consistent effect was shown for imipramine. Fourteen studies (13 in school children and 1 in adults) evaluated long-term therapy (> or = 12 weeks) and showed a trend to general improvement regardless of treatment, but the length of followup was inadequate. MPH may reduce behavioral disturbance in children with ADHD while it is taken. Academic performance does not appear to be improved with stimulants. Twelve studies evaluated treatment in adults with ADHD. For MPH vs. placebo, the results were contradictory. Antidepressants may be effective in adults, but no beneficial effect was seen with pemoline, nicotine, or phenylalanine compared with placebo. Thirty-two reports (29 studies) evaluated adverse effects of drug therapy; many of the side effects associated with stimulant use appear to be relatively mild and of short duration and to respond to dosing or timing adjustments. Data are inadequate on the long-term effects and severity of adverse effects of most interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This report describes rigorous systematic reviews on the treatment of ADHD, ready for incorporation into evidence-based clinical practice guidelines or performance measures. The report also provides a detailed description of the many limitations of the evidence available and provides recommendations to fill existing knowledge gaps. Studies on ADHD have low reporting quality, methodological flaws, and heterogeneity across outcome measures and tests. A detailed description is included of the many limitations of the available evidence plus recommendations to fill existing knowledge gaps. Fulfilling such knowledge gaps will not be easy and will require genuine collaboration among decisionmakers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence report/technology assessment (Summary)\",\"volume\":\" 11\",\"pages\":\"i-viii, 1-341\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4782276/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence report/technology assessment (Summary)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence report/technology assessment (Summary)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定(a)药物和非药物干预对儿童和成人注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)的长期和短期有效性和安全性;(b)联合干预是否比单独干预更有效。检索策略:MEDLINE(1966年起),CINAHL(1982年起),HEALTHStar(1975年起),PsycINFO(1984年起),EMBASE(1984年起),1997年11月完成Cochrane Library检索。还检索了符合条件的研究的参考清单以及研究小组成员和伙伴组织的档案。入选标准:如果研究的重点是人类多动症的治疗,并且在同行评议的期刊上以任何语言发表完整的报告,就会被选中。如果提供ADHD患者的单独亚组分析,则报告了包括ADHD以外条件的研究。数据收集和分析:两位评论者独立提取了41个变量的一般特征数据,以及干预措施、结果和测试的详细信息。分歧通过协商一致或由第三位研究人员解决。由于报告的质量较低,并且结果测量和测试之间存在异质性,因此没有对研究进行定量合并。主要结果:78项研究(77项随机对照试验)符合纳入标准。23项比较药物的研究表明,哌醋甲酯(MPH)、右苯丙胺(DEX)和培莫林之间几乎没有差异;比较兴奋剂和三环类抗抑郁药的研究尚无定论。六项研究比较了药物与非药物干预,一致表明兴奋剂,特别是MPH,可能比非药物干预更有效。20项研究比较了联合疗法与兴奋剂或单独的非药物干预;联合治疗没有显示出额外的有益效果。九项研究比较了三环类抗抑郁药与安慰剂,结果显示地西帕明可能比安慰剂更有效;丙咪嗪没有一致的效果。14项研究(13项针对学龄儿童,1项针对成人)评估了长期治疗(>或= 12周),并显示出无论治疗方式如何,总体改善的趋势,但随访时间不足。MPH可以减少ADHD儿童在服用期间的行为障碍。兴奋剂似乎并没有提高学习成绩。12项研究评估了成人多动症的治疗方法。对于MPH和安慰剂,结果是矛盾的。抗抑郁药可能对成人有效,但与安慰剂相比,哌莫林、尼古丁或苯丙氨酸没有任何有益效果。32份报告(29项研究)评估了药物治疗的不良反应;与使用兴奋剂有关的许多副作用似乎相对轻微,持续时间短,并对剂量或时间调整有反应。关于大多数干预措施的长期影响和不良影响严重程度的数据不足。结论:本报告描述了对ADHD治疗的严格系统评价,准备纳入循证临床实践指南或绩效衡量。该报告还详细描述了现有证据的许多局限性,并提出了填补现有知识空白的建议。对ADHD的研究报告质量低,方法上有缺陷,结果测量和测试的异质性。详细描述了现有证据的许多局限性,并提出了填补现有知识空白的建议。填补这样的知识空白并不容易,需要决策者之间的真正合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Objectives: To determine (a) the long-term and short-term effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults and (b) whether combined interventions are more effective than individual interventions.

Search strategy: MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), HEALTHStar (from 1975), PsycINFO (from 1984), EMBASE (from 1984), and the Cochrane Library searches were completed in November 1997. Reference lists of eligible studies and files of members of the research team and partner organizations were also searched.

Selection criteria: Studies were selected if they focused on the treatment of ADHD in humans and were published in any language as a full report in peer-reviewed journals. Studies including conditions other than ADHD were reported if separate subgroup analyses for patients with ADHD were provided.

Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers independently extracted data for 41 variables on general characteristics, along with detailed information on interventions, outcomes, and tests. Differences were resolved by consensus or by a third researcher. Studies were not combined quantitatively because the quality of reporting was low and heterogeneity existed across outcome measures and tests.

Main results: Seventy-eight studies (77 randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three studies compared drugs and showed few, if any, differences among methylphenidate (MPH), dextroamphetamine (DEX), and pemoline; studies comparing stimulants with tricyclic antidepressants (2) were inconclusive. Six studies compared drugs with nondrug interventions and showed consistently that stimulants, particularly MPH, may be more effective than nonpharmacological interventions. Twenty studies compared combination therapies with a stimulant or a nondrug intervention alone; no additional beneficial effects for combination therapies were shown. Nine studies compared tricyclic antidepressants with placebo and showed that desipramine may be more effective than placebo; no consistent effect was shown for imipramine. Fourteen studies (13 in school children and 1 in adults) evaluated long-term therapy (> or = 12 weeks) and showed a trend to general improvement regardless of treatment, but the length of followup was inadequate. MPH may reduce behavioral disturbance in children with ADHD while it is taken. Academic performance does not appear to be improved with stimulants. Twelve studies evaluated treatment in adults with ADHD. For MPH vs. placebo, the results were contradictory. Antidepressants may be effective in adults, but no beneficial effect was seen with pemoline, nicotine, or phenylalanine compared with placebo. Thirty-two reports (29 studies) evaluated adverse effects of drug therapy; many of the side effects associated with stimulant use appear to be relatively mild and of short duration and to respond to dosing or timing adjustments. Data are inadequate on the long-term effects and severity of adverse effects of most interventions.

Conclusions: This report describes rigorous systematic reviews on the treatment of ADHD, ready for incorporation into evidence-based clinical practice guidelines or performance measures. The report also provides a detailed description of the many limitations of the evidence available and provides recommendations to fill existing knowledge gaps. Studies on ADHD have low reporting quality, methodological flaws, and heterogeneity across outcome measures and tests. A detailed description is included of the many limitations of the available evidence plus recommendations to fill existing knowledge gaps. Fulfilling such knowledge gaps will not be easy and will require genuine collaboration among decisionmakers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信