Article

Genetics of childhood disorders: XLIV. autism, part 3: psychopharmacology of autism.

Department of Psychiatry, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 6.97). 12/2002; 41(11):1380-3. DOI: 10.1097/00004583-200211000-00021
Source: PubMed
0 Bookmarks
 · 
69 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of the study was to evaluate saliva flow rate, buffer capacity, pH levels, and dental caries experience (DCE) in autistic individuals, comparing the results with a control group (CG). The study was performed on 25 noninstitutionalized autistic boys, divided in two groups. G1 composed of ten children, ages 3-8. G2 composed of 15 adolescents ages 9-13. The CG was composed of 25 healthy boys, randomly selected and also divided in two groups: CG3 composed of 14 children ages 4-8, and CG4 composed of 11 adolescents ages 9-14. Whole saliva was collected under slight suction, and pH and buffer capacity were determined using a digital pHmeter. Buffer capacity was measured by titration using 0.01 N HCl, and the flow rate expressed in ml/min, and the DCE was expressed by decayed, missing, and filled teeth (permanent dentition [DMFT] and primary dentition [dmft]). Data were plotted and submitted to nonparametric (Kruskal-Wallis) and parametric (Student's t test) statistical tests with a significance level less than 0.05. When comparing G1 and CG3, groups did not differ in flow rate, pH levels, buffer capacity, or DMFT. Groups G2 and CG4 differ significantly in pH (p = 0.007) and pHi = 7.0 (p = 0.001), with lower scores for G2. In autistic individuals aged 3-8 and 9-13, medicated or not, there was no significant statistical difference in flow rate, pH, and buffer capacity. The comparison of DCE among autistic children and CG children with deciduous (dmft) and mixed/permanent decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT) did not show statistical difference (p = 0.743). Data suggest that autistic individuals have neither a higher flow rate nor a better buffer capacity. Similar DCE was observed in both groups studied.
    Clinical Oral Investigations 08/2008; 13(1):23-7. · 2.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study provides detailed information about stimulant medication treatment for the target symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsivity, disinhibition, and inattention in children with autism. In a previous study, 124 subjects fulfilling DSM-IV-based research criteria for autistic disorder were identified among all 0-21 year old residents of Olmsted County, MN from 1976-1997. For each of these 124 children with research-identified autism, information was abstracted on all prescribed psychopharmacological medications. Psychostimulants were used to treat 52.4% (N = 65) of the 124 subjects. The median total duration of psychostimulant treatment was 4.0 years. There were 398 episodes of psychostimulant treatment. Favorable responses were associated with 69.4% of treatment episodes. Of the 398 episodes of stimulant treatment, 16.8% were associated with a documented side effect. At least one side effect was experienced by 66% of the children. These results indicate that psychostimulants are commonly prescribed for children with autism, and suggest that these medications may improve the target symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsivity, disinhibition and inattention.
    Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics 05/2008; 29(2):75-81. · 1.75 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Youths with pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs) often have symptoms that fail to respond to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) treatment. These children may be given a subsequent trial of another SSRI. This study reports on the outcome of PDD youths who received a second SSRI trial after an initial treatment failure. Clinic charts were reviewed for 22 outpatient youths with a DSM-IV diagnosis of a PDD who were treated with an SSRI after an initial failure with a previous SSRI. Response for the second SSRI trial was determined using the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale (CGI-I). Treatment indications, symptom severity, demographic data, and side effects were recorded. For the second SSRI trial, 31.8% of the subjects were rated as much improved on the CGI-I scale and determined to be responders, with 68.2% of the subjects demonstrating activation side effects. 90% of subjects demonstrated activation side effects when data from both SSRI trials were combined. There were no statistically significant associations between outcome of the second SSRI trial and clinical/demographic variables. A second trial of an SSRI after an initial SSRI treatment failure was often unsuccessful in children and adolescents with PDDs. Activation side effects were common. Because alternative treatments in this population are limited, a second trial of an SSRI may still be considered. The study was limited by its retrospective design and by its small sample size.
    Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology 05/2009; 19(2):111-7. · 2.59 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
0 Downloads
Available from