Evidence, Interpretation, and Qualification From Multiple Reports of Long-Term Outcomes in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children With ADHD (MTA) Part I: Executive Summary

UCI Child Development Center, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92612, USA.
Journal of Attention Disorders (Impact Factor: 2.4). 08/2008; 12(1):4-14. DOI: 10.1177/1087054708319345
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To review the primary and secondary findings from the Multimodal Treatment study of ADHD (MTA) published over the past decade as three sets of articles.
In a two-part article-Part I: Executive Summary (without distracting details) and Part II: Supporting Details (with additional background and detail required by the complexity of the MTA)-we address confusion and controversy about the findings.
We discuss the basic features of the gold standard used to produce scientific evidence, the randomized clinical trial, for which was used to contrast four treatment conditions: medication management alone (MedMgt), behavior therapy alone (Beh), the combination of these two (Comb), and a community comparison of treatment "as usual" (CC). For each of the three assessment points we review three areas that we believe are important for appreciation of the findings: definition of evidence from the MTA, interpretation of the serial presentations of findings at each assessment point with a different definition of long-term, and qualification of the interim conclusions about long-term effects of treatments for ADHD.
We discuss the possible clinical relevance of the MTA and present some practical suggestions based on current knowledge and uncertainties facing families, clinicians, and investigators regarding the long-term use of stimulant medication and behavioral therapy in the treatment of children with ADHD.


Available from: Peter S Jensen, Jun 08, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Evaluation of treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) previously focused on symptom control, but attention has shifted to functional outcomes. The effect of different ADHD treatment periods and modalities (pharmacological, non-pharmacological, and combination) on long-term outcomes needs to be more comprehensively understood. A systematic search of 12 literature databases using Cochrane's guidelines yielded 403 English-language peer-reviewed, primary studies reporting long-term outcomes (≥2 years). We evaluated relative effects of treatment modalities and durations and effect sizes of outcomes reported as statistically significantly improved with treatment. The highest proportion of improved outcomes was reported with combination treatment (83% of outcomes). Among significantly improved outcomes, the largest effect sizes were found for combination treatment. The greatest improvements were associated with academic, self-esteem, or social function outcomes. A majority of outcomes improved regardless of age of treatment initiation (60%-75%) or treatment duration (62%-72%). Studies with short treatment duration had shorter follow-up times (mean 3.2 years total study length) than those with longer treatment durations (mean 7.1 years total study length). Studies with follow-up times <3 years reported benefit with treatment for 93% of outcomes, whereas those with follow-up times ≥3 years reported treatment benefit for 57% of outcomes. Post-hoc analysis indicated that this result was related to the measurement of outcomes at longer periods (3.2 versus 0.4 years) after treatment cessation in studies with longer total study length. While the majority of long-term outcomes of ADHD improve with all treatment modalities, the combination of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment was most consistently associated with improved long-term outcomes and large effect sizes. Older treatment initiation age or longer durations did not markedly affect proportion of improved outcomes reported, but measurement of outcomes long periods after treatment cessation may attenuate results.
    PLoS ONE 02/2015; 10(2):e0116407. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0116407 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective: This study investigated the trends in neurocognitive function and behavioral symptoms among patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) during 24 months of treatment with methylphenidate in a clinical setting. Methods: Study participants consisted of 181 ADHD patients with a mean age of 13.4±2.5 years (ages ranged from 8 to 18 years; 151 boys and 30 girls) who were prescribed oral short-acting methylphenidate two or three times daily, with each dose ranging between 0.3 and 1.0 mg/kg. At baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months from baseline, neurocognitive function was assessed using the Test of Variables of Attention (TOVA) on the day the patient was off medication, and behavioral symptoms were evaluated using the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Version IV Scale for ADHD (SNAP-IV) parent form, the SNAP-IV teacher form, and the ADHD-Rating Scale (completed by a child psychiatrist). Results: Of the 181 ADHD patients at the initial visit, 103 (56.9%) completed the study. During the 24-month methylphenidate treatment, only the commission errors in TOVA significantly improved; however, the omission errors, response time, response time variability, response sensitivity, and ADHD score did not. The behavioral symptoms of ADHD, observed by various informants, all declined substantially, and were significantly correlated with each other during the long-term follow-up. The severity of teacher ratings was lower than that of parent and psychiatrist ratings. However, the teacher-rated inattention symptoms showed the strongest correlations with TOVA performance. Conclusions: Findings suggest that neurocognitive deficits in ADHD patients, except inhibition ability, might be long lasting in realistic settings. In addition, obtaining behavior profile assessments from multiple informants, especially from teachers, is vital for establishing a complete understanding of ADHD patients.
    Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology 01/2015; 25(3). DOI:10.1089/cap.2014.0015 · 3.07 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Given major increases in the diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and in rates of medication for this condition, we carefully examine evidence for effects of single versus multimodal (i.e., combined medication and psychosocial/behavioral) interventions for ADHD. Our primary data source is the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA), a 14-month, randomized clinical trial in which intensive behavioral, medication, and multimodal treatment arms were contrasted with one another and with community intervention (treatment-as-usual), regarding outcome domains of ADHD symptoms, comorbidities, and core functional impairments. Although initial reports emphasized the superiority of well-monitored medication for symptomatic improvement, reanalyses and reappraisals have highlighted (1) the superiority of combination treatment for composite outcomes and for domains of functional impairment (e.g., academic achievement, social skills, parenting practices); (2) the importance of considering moderator and mediator processes underlying differential patterns of outcome, including comorbid subgroups and improvements in family discipline style during the intervention period; (3) the emergence of side effects (e.g., mild growth suppression) in youth treated with long-term medication; and (4) the diminution of medication's initial superiority once the randomly assigned treatment phase turned into naturalistic follow-up. The key paradox is that while ADHD clearly responds to medication and behavioral treatment in the short term, evidence for long-term effectiveness remains elusive. We close with discussion of future directions and a call for greater understanding of relevant developmental processes in the attempt to promote optimal, generalized, and lasting treatments for this important and impairing neurodevelopmental disorder.For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.Conflict of interest: Dr. Arnold has consulted with or been on advisory boards for Gowlings, Neuropharm, Novartis, Noven, Organon, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Seaside Therapeutics, Sigma Tau, Shire, and Tris Pharma and received travel support from Noven.
    Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science 01/2015; 6(1). DOI:10.1002/wcs.1324 · 0.79 Impact Factor