X

Download Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use PowerPoint Presentation

SlidesFinder-Advertising-Design.jpg

Login   OR  Register
X


Iframe embed code :



Presentation url :

Home / Health & Wellness / Health & Wellness Presentations / Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use PowerPoint Presentation

Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use PowerPoint Presentation

Ppt Presentation Embed Code   Zoom Ppt Presentation

PowerPoint is the world's most popular presentation software which can let you create professional Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use powerpoint presentation easily and in no time. This helps you give your presentation on Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use in a conference, a school lecture, a business proposal, in a webinar and business and professional representations.

The uploader spent his/her valuable time to create this Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use powerpoint presentation slides, to share his/her useful content with the world. This ppt presentation uploaded by onlinesearch in Health & Wellness ppt presentation category is available for free download,and can be used according to your industries like finance, marketing, education, health and many more.

About This Presentation

Does ADHD Beget Later Substance Use Presentation Transcript

Slide 1 - Does the Pharmacotherapy of ADHD Beget Later Substance Abuse?A Meta-Analytic Review of the Literature Clinical Research Program in Pediatric Psychopharmacology Massachusetts General Hospital Harvard Medical School Timothy E. Wilens, M.D., Stephen V. Faraone, Ph.D. Joseph Biederman, M.D. Samantha Gunawardene, B.S.
Slide 2 - It is estimated that ADHD affects 4-9 % of youth Stimulant drugs are a mainstay of treatment for ADHD and are highly effective in the treatment of ADHD youth and adults However concerns remain as to whether the use of stimulants in ADHD youth could increase the risk for substance use disorders (Vitiello, JAACAP, 2001) Background
Slide 3 - Preclinical animal studies suggest that stimulants (methylphenidate [MPH] & amphetamine [AMPH]) may lead to later kindling and other behaviors indicative of substance abuse (DEA Review MS, 1995; Kollins et al., Pharm, Biochem, Behavior 68: 2001) However, other preclinical studies and concerns of species generalization and routes of administration of tested compounds (IV, IM, IP, PO) has confounded animal work (Volkow et al., Arch Gen Psych, 1995; Volkow et al., J Neurosci, 2001; Garasimov et al., J Clin Pharm Ther, 2001) Background
Slide 4 - Research findings in human subjects/ patients have produced discrepant findings: A recent study by Biederman et al. 1999 (Pediatrics 104, 1999) and Wilens et al (CPDD, 1998) showed that anti-ADHD pharmacotherapy protected ADHD youth from later SUD A study by Lambert et al. 1999 (J Learn Dis 31, 1999) showed the opposite, that cocaine and nicotine abuse were associated with previous stimulant treatment Background
Slide 5 - In contrast, untreated ADHD is a risk factor for later SUD (Shekim et al., Compr Psych, 1990; Biederman et al., Am J Psych, 1993, 1995; Katusic et al, presentation, 2003) Noncomorbid ADHD (Wilens et al, JNMD, 1997) Conduct or Bipolar Disorder plus ADHD (Hechtman and Weiss, 1985 Mannuzza et al., AGP, 1993; Wilens et al. JAACAP 1999) Background
Slide 6 - Onset of Substance Abuse in Untreated ADHD Adults(Retrospectively Derived) ADHD Control Age of Onset Probability * *p<.05 vs control 6
Slide 7 - ADHD Risk of Substance Abuse Sharp rise in SA between mid-adolescence and adulthood ? % with SUD
Slide 8 - Does the Pharmacotherapy of ADHD Beget Later Substance Abuse?A Meta-Analytic Review of the Literature Specific Aim To examine the putative association between prior exposure to stimulants and later SUD.
Slide 9 - Hypotheses The first is the null hypothesis that pharmacotherapy would have no demonstrable effect on the development of SUD in ADHD children. The first alternative hypothesis is that exposure to pharmacotherapy would predict a higher risk for SUD in general, and stimulant abuse in particular. The second alternative hypothesis posited that pharmacological management of ADHD would diminish the later risk for SUD.
Slide 10 - One approach to reconciling conflicting findings is the application of meta-analysis This method evaluates if the aggregate evidence across all available studies provides evidence for statistical significance Methods
Slide 11 - We conducted a systematic literature search of prospective and retrospective studies of children, adolescents, and adults with ADHD that had information relating childhood exposure to stimulant therapy and SUD in adolescence or adulthood. We searched journal articles through PubMed at the National Library of Medicine and used additional data from scientific presentations at scientific meetings. Studies had to have at least four years of followup. Methods
Slide 12 - We identified the following studies: -Loney et al. 1998, 2001 also cited in Paternite et al. 1999 (tx=182, untx=37) -Lambert et al. 1999 (tx=93, untx=81) -Biederman et al. 1999& Wilens et al. 1999 (tx=145, untx=45, ctrls) -Molina et al. 1999 (tx=53, untx=73) -Huss et al. 1999 (tx=103, untx=103) -Barkley et al. 2002 (tx=98, untx=21) -Huss et al., 2003 (tx =92, untx = 69) Total sample = 766 Tx with stimulants and 429 unTx with stimulants (N = 1195) Methods
Slide 13 - We applied meta-analysis to all longer-term studies (>4 years) in which pharmacologically treated and untreated groups of ADHD individuals were examined for SUD outcomes We used a random effects meta-analysis to analyze the odds-ratios using the method of Carlin (Statistics in Medicine, 1992) Methods
Slide 14 - For the analysis, each study provided the two by two table classifying subjects by treatment status([stimulant pharmacotherapy] or not) and the subsequent development of SUD (present or not) using the odds ratio. For these studies, the odds-ratio estimates the increase in the odds of NOT developing SUD (i.e. protective effect) among those individuals previously treated pharmacologically compared to individuals with ADHD not treated pharmacologically. Methods
Slide 15 - Meta-analyses was used to evaluate the direction and strength of the overall association, differential effects on drug or alcohol use disorders, and the potential effects of covariates Since for many psychiatric disorders, people with more severe disorders are usually given more intense treatments and for many disorders increasing severity predicts worse outcome, we also assessed studies for evidence of baseline severity differences between the treated and untreated ADHD groups (Faraone et al. 1992) Methods
Slide 16 - 0 1 2 3 4 5 Lambert 1998 Biederman 1999 Huss 1999 Loney 1999 Molina 1999 Barkley 2002 Huss 2003 Odds Ratio * * * indicates p<0.05 Drug Studies protective deleterious *
Slide 17 - 0 1 2 3 4 5 Lambert 1998 Biederman 1999 Loney 1999 Molina 1999 Barkley 2002 Odds Ratio * * * * indicates p<0.05 Alcohol Studies protective deleterious
Slide 18 - 0 1 2 3 4 5 Lambert 1998-Alcohol Lambert 1998-Drug Biederman 1999-Alcohol Biederman 1999-Drug Huss 1999-Drug Loney 1999-Alcohol Loney 1999-Drug Molina 1999-Alcohol Molina 1999-Drug Barkley 2002-Alcohol Barkley 2002-Drug Odds Ratio Sensitivity Analyses
Slide 19 - The results of this meta-analysis examining the impact of early medication treatment for ADHD in childhood on subsequent SUD outcome in adolescent and young adult years shows that stimulant pharmacotherapy for ADHD significantly decreases the risk for subsequent SUD (z= 2.4, p=0.02) Results Pooled Odds Ratio = 2.0
Slide 20 - There was a significant effect of study design (z=2.9, p=0.004) indicating that studies in which groups of treated and untreated youth with ADHD had similar baseline severity found larger (protective) odds ratios than studies that had dissimilar baseline severity Results
Slide 21 - As a group, the data from studies which had similar baseline severity showed a statistically significant protective effect (OR=4.3). Data points from the two studies (Lambert, J Learn Dis, 1999; Barkley, Pediatrics, 2002) that did not have similar baseline severity between treatment groups suggest that stimulants increased the risk for SUD outcomes (OR=0.7). Results
Slide 22 - Baseline Severity Issue More Severe Illness Poorer Outcome (confounded association with more Tx) (Wilens et al., Pediatrics:2003)
Slide 23 - Baseline Severity Issue More Severe Illness Poorer Outcome (confounded association with more Tx) More Treatment (Wilens et al., Pediatrics:2003)
Slide 24 - Baseline Severity Issue More Severe Illness Poorer Outcome (confounded association with more Tx) More Treatment (Wilens et al., Pediatrics:2003)
Slide 25 - A meta-analysis regression found no effect of type of substance (drug vs alcohol; 2.4 vs. 4.0; z=1.1, p=0.3). The risk for SUD did not differ between medicated ADHD youth and non-ADHD controls Results
Slide 26 - 0 1 2 3 4 5 Adulthood Adolescence Odds Ratio * * * indicates p<0.05 Age Effect protective deleterious
Slide 27 - We assessed for publication bias using the method of Egger (British Medical Journal, 315, 1997). This method is based on the fact that the precision of the odds-ratio increases with larger sample sizes. Egger’s method regresses the standard normal deviate of the odds ratio (the odds-ratio divided by its standard error) against the precision of the odds ratio (the inverse of its standard error). The publication bias statistic was NOT SIGNIFICANT (t=0.05, p=0.6) indicating that the group of studies that controlled for baseline severity did not overestimate the protective effect of stimulants Results
Slide 28 - Small number of overall studies (N=7) & subjects (N = 1195) Some studies published, some presented (all peer reviewed) Majority of youth were males The naturalistic, nonrandomized nature of these studies may have created confounds (severity of illness, comorbidity, family history of SUD) that may have independently affected outcome. Not all youth stimulant treated (4% other medications) Duration and adequacy of TX not delineated SUD outcome relied on self or parental report Criteria used to denote abuse or dependence of substances varied between studies. Limitations
Slide 29 - Despite the limitations this meta-analysis indicates that the pharmacotherapy of ADHD does NOT increase the risk for subsequent SUD. Conclusion In contrast, the available data suggest that stimulant medication has a protective effect on later SUD. Stimulant Treatment of ADHD reduces the risk for later SUD by 50%
Slide 30 - Stimulant treatment of ADHD appears to reduce the risk for substance abuse in half Does not “immunize” against SUD Conclusion SUD in UnTX adults with ADHD & Ctrls – Appears to reduce the risk for SUD in ADHD youth to “population risk”
Slide 31 - Our finding of a less robust protective effect of stimulant treatment in reducing SUD in adulthood (1.7 fold) relative to adolescence (5.8 fold) is noteworthy. Adolescents not fully through age of SUD risk (e.g. 19 to 22 years) (Wilens et al., J Nerv Ment Dis, 1997) Exposure more distal to SUD Monitoring of patients receiving medications Other undetermined issues Conclusion
Slide 32 - From a public health perspective, the findings of a protective effect of stimulants for SUD in youth with ADHD are among the strongest within Child Psychiatry indicating the preventive influence of treatment on the development of substance abuse. Conclusions
Slide 33 - Further studies investigating the long-term SUD outcome and putative mechanisms of reduced SUD risk in youth with ADHD of both sexes treated pharmacologically are necessary. Conclusion