Search

Introduction: Literature regarding efficacy of educational programs in ADHD is scarce, with important methodological flaws [1–3]. Objectives: To evaluate clinical efficacy of a specific psychoeducational program on families with ADHD children/adolescents. Methods: Double blind RCT; intervention-psychoeducation group (n = 43), and active control-group (n = 37). Parents attended 12 weekly sessions, 90 min length in groups of 8–10 families and received a structured-evidence-based psychoeducational program (intervention), the controls attended supporting groups (active control). Families were evaluated after 6-month follow-up. Results: Participant families did not differ in terms of age, gender, diagnosis or comorbidities. Parents of ADHD children in the psychoeducation group presented improvement of ADHD symptoms measured by Conners total scale and Conners index (p\0.028 and 0.001, respectively) and when compared to the control group (ES = 0.60 and 0.89). Similar differences were found at 6-month follow-up. Conclusions: Psychoeducation intervention can be regarded as a good alternative to standardized treatment on ADHD. Further studies are required in order to disentangle which ADHD groups may be benefited the most with this specific type of intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Iowa gambling task have been used in ADHD to study problems associated with real-life decision making [1, 2]. Method: The aim is to explore this cognitive bias in a sample of 118 children and adolescents with ADHD (DSM-IV) criteria (n = 86 combined; n = 32 inattentive) using a new paradigm (‘‘jumping to conclusion’’). This task consists of drawings of common objects displayed on a computer screen in decreasing degrees of fragmentation. Results: Five parameters were calculated: Jumping-To-Conclusions at first stage (JTC-1), Plausibility Rating at first stage (PR-1), Draws- To-Decision (DTD), Time-Response at first stage (TR-1) and Time- Response for Draw to Decision (TR-DTD). In comparison with the inattentive type, significantly more of the combined type patients made a definitive decision at the first stage (JTC-1: 44.2 vs. 15.6%, p = 0.004), showed higher levels of conviction when making a decision (higher Plausibility Rating PR-1), and needed fewer stages (lower DTD) when making a decision than the inattentive subgroup (4.54 ± 2.22 vs. 5.62 ± 1.84; p = 0.016). Conclusions: ADHD combined children make quicker decisions with a higher level of conviction and may manifest a data-gathering bias when compared to the inattentive subtype. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Few studies have compared cognitive functioning in ADHD children and adolescents with or without comorbid anxiety. Children with ADHD and anxiety have shown more impairment on some tasks (e.g. Trail Making test B, working memory), but less on others [2, 3]. Such contradictory findings may be explained by the different effects of anxiety on the processing and storage of information and motivation. The attention control theory (ACT) is an approach to anxiety and cognition that further develops the previous processing efficiency theory (PET). The ACT holds that anxiety impairs executive function efficiency by disrupting the balance between the stimulus-driven attentional system and the goal-directed attentional system [1]. Objective: To explore the effects of anxiety in cognitive function according to specific ADHD subtypes (combined or inattentive), and in relation with previous theories regarding anxiety and cognitive performance. Methods: We included 78 patients with a diagnosis of ADHD attending a Child and Adolescent Psychiatric service in Jae´n (Spain). Patients were divided according to the specific subtype (combined: n = 55, and inattentive: n = 23). Independent variables were cognitive function measured by (1) Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test for immediate, short- and long-term auditory memories, (2) short-term visual memory and visual planning-organization ability measured by Rey-Osterreich Complex Figure, and (3) divided attention measured by Trail Making Test B. Anxiety levels were assessed using the Conners subscale for parental anxiety. Results: Mean age was 11.26 ± 2.43 years for inattention subtype, and 10.47 ± 3.27 years for the combined subtype. We found no differences between subtypes for any of the variables explored. Patients with low levels of anxiety (below median) showed similar cognitive functioning in both the combined and the inattentive subtypes. However, children with high levels of anxiety (above median) showed a different pattern of functioning according to the specific ADHD subtype. While improvement in the long-term auditory memory was seen for the inattentive subtype, the combined type showed worsening of long-term auditory memory, the differences between groups being statistically significant (p\0.05). Similarly, we obtained a positive interaction (p = 0.018) between the two groups in the multivariable analysis, the inattentive subtype with high levels of anxiety showing improvement in functioning, whereas subjects with combined subtype and high levels of anxiety worsened in function (p = 0.037). Again, a positive interaction (p = 0.026) was found for divided attention, the combined type showing more errors than the inattentive subtype (p = 0.010) when high levels of anxiety were reported. Discussion and conclusion: High levels of anxiety were seen to affect long-term auditory memory and visual planning-organising ability differently, depending on ADHD subtype. These results are in line with previous theories about anxiety and cognitive performance that suggest anxiety has a dual effect (worsening the processing and storage capacity of working memory, while increasing motivation and auxiliary processing resources), and enhances the influence of stimulus- driven attention as opposed to goal-directed attention. Our findings, while contradictory, coincide with the observations of some previous studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Impairments in executive function are thought to play a key role in a variety of developmental disorders including ADHD [1]. Objective: To explore planning skills in children/adolescents with different neurodevelopmental disorders (ADHD n = 42, early onset psychosis n = 58, and ASD n = 37), and to compare them with a control group (n = 31). Methods: We used the Zoo Map task [2, 3]. The ZM assesses ability to organize and implement a plan in both non-structured and structured conditions. We registered planning time, total time for completing the task, and number of errors. Results: ADHD group needed more time for planning when compared to the rest of the groups (p < 0.05) but only for the nonstructured condition. ASD made more commission errors when compared to ADHD and controls in both the structured and nonstructured versions (p < 0.05). EOP planning function was the poorest in all variables when compared to the rest of the groups. Discussion: ADHD subjects may present with deficits in planning task, but especially in the non-structured situations. Neurodevelopmental disorders present differences in planning function when compared between them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]