ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children and Adolescents

Alex Haga — Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:54:05 +0000

Date Added:

April 4, 2024

Journal/Publication:

Comparative Effectiveness Review

Publisher:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publication Date:

March 1, 2024

URL:

ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children and Adolescents

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER267

An evidence-based summary of what we currently know about the diagnosis and treatment of children with ADHD. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Objective. The systematic review assessed evidence on the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents to inform a planned update of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) guidelines.

Data sources. We searched PubMed®, Embase®, PsycINFO®, ERIC, clinicaltrials.gov, and prior reviews for primary studies published since 1980. The report includes studies published to June 15, 2023.

Review methods. The review followed a detailed protocol and was supported by a Technical Expert Panel. Citation screening was facilitated by machine learning; two independent reviewers screened full text citations for eligibility. We abstracted data using software designed for systematic reviews. Risk of bias assessments focused on key sources of bias for diagnostic and intervention studies. We conducted strength of evidence (SoE) and applicability assessments for key outcomes. The protocol for the review has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022312656).

Results. Searches identified 23,139 citations, and 7,534 were obtained as full text. We included 550 studies reported in 1,097 publications (231 studies addressed diagnosis, 312 studies addressed treatment, and 10 studies addressed monitoring). Diagnostic studies reported on the diagnostic performance of numerous parental ratings, teacher rating scales, teen/child self-reports, clinician tools, neuropsychological tests, EEG approaches, imaging, and biomarkers. Multiple approaches showed promising diagnostic performance (e.g., using parental rating scales), although estimates of performance varied considerably across studies and the SoE was generally low. Few studies reported estimates for children under the age of 7. Treatment studies evaluated combined pharmacological and behavior approaches, medication approved by the Food and Drug Administration, other pharmacologic treatment, psychological/behavioral approaches, cognitive training, neurofeedback, neurostimulation, physical exercise, nutrition and supplements, integrative medicine, parent support, school interventions, and provider or model-of-care interventions. Medication treatment was associated with improved broadband scale scores and ADHD symptoms (high SoE) as well as function (moderate SoE), but also appetite suppression and adverse events (high SoE). Psychosocial interventions also showed improvement in ADHD symptoms based on moderate SoE. Few studies have evaluated combinations of pharmacological and youth-directed psychosocial interventions, and we did not find combinations that were systematically superior to monotherapy (low SoE). Published monitoring approaches for ADHD were limited and the SoE is insufficient.

Conclusion. Many diagnostic tools are available to aid the diagnosis of ADHD, but few monitoring strategies have been studied. Medication therapies remain important treatment options, although with a risk of side effects, as the evidence base for psychosocial therapies strengthens and other nondrug treatment approaches emerge.

Author/s:

Peterson, BS, Trampush, J, Maglione, M, Bolshakova, M, Brown, M., Rozelle, M

Interventions for Breathlessness in Patients With Advanced Cancer

Brian Desmarais — Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:38:27 +0000

Date Added:

December 1, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publication Date:

November 11, 2020

URL:

Interventions for Breathlessness in Patients With Advanced Cancer

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.23970/AHRQEPCCER232

MeSH

In end-stage cancer patients with breathlessness, the evidence supporting non-pharmacologic interventions is stronger than the evidence for pharmacologic strategies. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Main Points

For patients with advanced cancer:

Airflow interventions (fans) were more effective for improving breathlessness compared with usual care or sham.
Bilevel ventilation (a form of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation) was more effective than standard supplemental oxygen for improving breathlessness.
Acupressure/reflexology were more effective than usual care or sham for improving breathlessness.
Neither behavioral/psychoeducational interventions alone nor activity/rehabilitation interventions alone were more effective than usual care for improving breathlessness. However, multicomponent nonpharmacological interventions that combined these, with integrative medicine interventions, were more effective than usual care for improving breathlessness.
Opioids were not more effective than placebo or anxiolytics for improving breathlessness or exercise capacity; most of these studies in advanced cancer were of exertional breathlessness. Studies on opioids showed no differences in effectiveness between different doses or routes of administration for improving breathlessness.
Anxiolytics were not more effective than placebo for improving breathlessness.
Both nonpharmacological and pharmacological interventions led to adverse event-related dropouts in a small percentage of patients.

Structured Abstract

Objectives. To assess benefits and harms of nonpharmacological and pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced cancer.

Data sources. We searched PubMed®, Embase®, CINAHL®, ISI Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through early May 2020.

Review methods. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with a comparison group evaluating benefits and/or harms, and cohort studies reporting harms. Two reviewers independently screened search results, serially abstracted data, assessed risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence (SOE) for key outcomes: breathlessness, anxiety, health-related quality of life, and exercise capacity. We performed meta-analyses when possible and calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs).

Results. We included 48 RCTs and 2 retrospective cohort studies (4,029 patients). The most commonly reported cancer types were lung cancer and mesothelioma. The baseline level of breathlessness varied in severity. Several nonpharmacological interventions were effective for breathlessness, including fans (SMD -2.09 [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.81 to -0.37]) (SOE: moderate), bilevel ventilation (estimated slope difference -0.58 [95% CI -0.92 to -0.23]), acupressure/reflexology, and multicomponent nonpharmacological interventions (behavioral/psychoeducational combined with activity/rehabilitation and integrative medicine). For pharmacological interventions, opioids were not more effective than placebo (SOE: moderate) for improving breathlessness (SMD -0.14 [95% CI -0.47 to 0.18]) or exercise capacity (SOE: moderate); most studies were of exertional breathlessness. Different doses or routes of administration of opioids did not differ in effectiveness for breathlessness (SOE: low). Anxiolytics were not more effective than placebo for breathlessness (SOE: low). Evidence for other pharmacological interventions was limited. Opioids, bilevel ventilation, and activity/rehabilitation interventions had some harms compared to usual care.

Conclusions. Some nonpharmacological interventions, including fans, acupressure/reflexology, multicomponent interventions, and bilevel ventilation, were effective for breathlessness in advanced cancer. Evidence did not support opioids or other pharmacological interventions within the limits of the identified studies. More research is needed on when the benefits of opioids may exceed harms for broader, longer term outcomes related to breathlessness in this population.

Author/s:

Gupta, A., Waldfogel, J.M., Sharma, R., Feliciano, J.L., Sedhom, R., Day, J., Gersten, R.A., Davidson, P.M.