What does the MTA study tell us about effective psychosocial treatment for ADHD?

Discussed the initial findings from the recently published, National Institute of Mental Health-sponsored Multimodal Treatment Study (MTA) of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). These findings can be summarized as follows: Medical management alone was found to be significantly more effective for the core symptoms of ADHD as compared to behavioral treatment alone and routine (community) care, and behavioral treatment did not significantly improve outcome when combined with medical treatment. In discussing these findings, it is important to be explicit about the research questions the study was and was not designed to answer. The MTA study provided useful information regarding the question, "Does a very intensive form of behavioral treatment deliver greater benefits than the less intensive forms of behavioral treatment investigated in prior studies?" but little insight on the question, "What type of treatment by what type of therapist is most effective in dealing with what specific problems among specific children with ADHD?" It is suggested that the clearest finding from the MTA study is that the effectiveness of psychosocial intervention for ADHD hinges on the degree to which a broad range of treatment ingredients are considered, carefully selected, matched, and tailored to the individual needs of each child with the disorder, and implemented and monitored over the long term.     

Comprehensive versus matched psychosocial treatment in the MTA study: conceptual and empirical issues

Addressed some factual inaccuracies and presented alternative positions on key issues raised in the article by Greene and Ablon (this issue) on the question, "What does the Multimodal Treatment Study (MTA) tell us about effective psychosocial treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)?" The Greene and Ablon critique does not present for the reader's consideration the full range of findings from the MTA study, notably those most relevant to psychosocial treatment, and articulates a theoretical position that effective treatment requires matching treatment to children's assessed needs, an approach not taken in the MTA study. In this article, I present the full range of findings from the MTA study related to psychosocial treatment effects, correct the misperceptions that exist about the study based on limited reviews such as Greene and Ablon's, and review the empirical and experimental design issues that produced the decision by the MTA investigative team to study the effects of intensive, comprehensive psychosocial treatment. I argue that the questions asked by the MTA study about psychosocial treatment were important, relevant, and were addressed well in the MTA study design.     

Psychosocial treatment issues in the MTA: a reply to Greene and Ablon

Discussed several of Greene and Ablon's (this issue) key points in their article about the Multimodal Treatment Study (MTA) of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). In particular, the following issues are addressed: (a) whether the medication management and behavioral arms of the MTA individualized treatment to comparable degrees; (b) whether cognitive-behavioral interventions were incorporated to an adequate extent; (c) whether core ADHD symptoms were overemphasized relative to other functional domains, both as treatment targets and outcome measures; and (d) whether parent and teacher characteristics warranted more emphasis than they were given. These issues are discussed and an attempt is made to fit the MTA findings into the larger context of prior studies on treatment of childhood ADHD. A theme of this commentary is the concern that in the current age of biological emphasis in the field of ADHD research, social, family, and motivational processes may not get the attention they deserve.     

Response to commentary on the multimodal treatment study of ADHD (MTA): mining the meaning of the MTA

In the December 2000 issue of the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, we published a set of papers presenting secondary analyses of the Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD (MTA), and R. A. Barkley (2000) provided a commentary. A critique of the design of the study (MTA Cooperative Group, 1999) was presented based on a theoretical perspective of a behavioral inhibition deficit that has been hypothesized as the core deficit of ADHD (R. A. Barkley, 1997). The commentary questioned the design and analysis of the MTA in terms of (1) the empirical criteria for selection of components of behavioral (Beh) intervention, (2) the effectiveness of the Beh intervention, (3) the methods for analyses at the group and individual level, (4) implications of the MTA findings for clinical practice, (5) the role of genetics in response to treatment, and (6) the lack of a nontreatment control group. In this response, we relate the content of the papers to the commentary, (1) by reviewing the selection criteria for the Beh treatment, as outlined by K. C. Wells, W. E. Pelham, et al. (2000), (2) by addressing the myth that the MTA Beh treatment was ineffective (Pelham, 1999), (3) by describing the use of analyses at the level of the individual participant, as presented by J. S. March et al. (2000) and W. E. Pelham et al. (2000) as well as elsewhere by J. M. Swanson et al. (2001) and C. K. Conners et al. (2001), (4) by relating some of the suggestions from the secondary analyses about clinically relevant factors such as comorbidity (as presented by J. S. March et al., 2000) and family and parental characteristics (as presented by B. Hoza et al., 2000, S. P. Hinshaw et al., 2000, and K. C. Wells, J. N. Epstein, et al., 2000), (5) by discussing the statistical concept of heritability and the lack of a significant difference in the presence of ADHD symptoms in parents of the MTA families compared to parents in the classmate-control families (as presented by J. N. Epstein, et al., 2000), and (6) by acknowledging that an ethically necessary weakness of the MTA design is that it did not include a no-treatment control group. We discuss the use of secondary analyses to suggest how, when, and for what subgroups effectiveness of the Beh treatment may have been manifested. Finally, we invite others to use the large and rich data set that will soon be available in the public domain, to perform secondary analyses to mine the meaning of the MTA and to evaluate theories of ADHD and response to treatments.     

ADHD and delinquency--a developmental perspective

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders of childhood and adolescence. Until now, it has been unclear whether ADHD by itself constitutes a risk factor for later delinquency or does so only in combination with other disruptive symptoms. This article seeks to give a comprehensive account of the literature to shed light on the developmental pathway from childhood ADHD to adult criminality. Comorbid ADHD and conduct disorder (CD) are significantly related to a range of biological and environmental risk factors such as neurocognitive impairment, high parental psychopathology, poor social functioning, and other comorbid mental disorders, particularly substance abuse, that are described in this review. In addition, the results of treatment studies are presented, with a special focus on the results of the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA). Although treatment programs, including medication and psychosocial treatment, can be very effective in improving the functioning of children with ADHD in the social and academic domains in the short term, there is no conclusive evidence that such treatments lower the risk for developing delinquency in adulthood.     

Nine Months of Multicomponent Behavioral Treatment for ADHD and Effectiveness of MTA Fading Procedures

We examined 9-month data from the 14-month NIMH Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (the MTA) as a further check on the relative effect of medication (MedMgt) and behavioral treatment (Beh) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) while Beh was still being delivered at greater intensity than at 14-month endpoint, and conversely as a check on the efficacy of the MTA behavioral generalization/maintenance procedures. Intention-to-treat analysis at 9 months showed essentially the same results as at 14 months, after Beh had been completely faded; MedMgt and the combination (Comb) of medication and Beh were significantly superior to Beh and community care (CC) for ADHD and oppositional-defiant (ODD) symptoms, with mixed results for social skills and internalizing symptoms. All treatment-group differences examined as changes in slopes from 9 to 14 months were nonsignificant (we found general improvement for all groups). Slopes from baseline to 9 months correlated highly (r > .74, p < .0001) with slopes from baseline to 14 months for all groups. The time function from baseline to 14 months showed a significant linear, but not quadratic, trend for the main outcome measure (a composite of parent- and teacher-rated ADHD and ODD symptoms) for all groups. Findings suggest that in contrast to the hypothesized deterioration in the relative benefit of Beh between 9 and 14 months (after completion of fading), the MTA Beh generalization and maintenance procedures implemented through 9 months apparently yielded continuing improvement through 14 months, with preservation of the relative position of Beh compared to other treatment strategies.     

ADHD treatment in the 21st century: pushing the envelope

Required for optimal intervention for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is evidence-based matching of child, treatment, and situation. The landmark Multimodal Treatment Study (MTA) of Children with ADHD documented the superiority of pharmacotherapy for the vast majority of children with ADHD. Although this study could not address the problem of the match directly, it is generating important leads for research on the use of psychosocial strategies to enhance the scope and durability of treatment gains while decreasing the risks attendant upon long-term use of medication. Given the inherent distinctions between pharmacological and psychosocial treatments, conclusive answers to questions about comparative efficacy will continue to elude scientist-practitioners. Needed next is research examining ways to improve outcomes beyond the effects of medication, using systematically tailored and sequenced psychosocial approaches and exploring new treatment targets, agents, and modalities. To illustrate, some emerging findings from an ongoing experience sampling study and implications for online therapy are discussed.     

Tailored psychosocial treatments for ADHD: the search for a good fit

Commented on the article "What Does the MTA Study Tell Us About Effective Psychosocial Treatment for ADHD?" by Greene and Ablon (this issue). In this article, these authors note that the Multimodal Treatment Study (MTA) did not focus on or provide information about how to match treatment to the needs of the individual child. They contend that cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT), which was not included in the MTA, can facilitate treatment tailoring if delivered appropriately. The authors offer several suggestions regarding how CBT can be structured to meet the needs of each child. This commentary points out that the MTA included psychosocial treatments with established rather than potential efficacy. Systematic studies are needed to determine whether the suggestions offered by Greene and Ablon have clinical utility. Matching treatment to the needs of individual patients remains the overarching goal of those interested in idiographic approaches to treatment. However, efforts to inform on treatment tailoring involve complex design and needs assessment methodologies. Several suggestions are offered regarding the technology of treatment tailoring. These include the use of goal attainment scaling to identify and evaluate individualized outcome measures and the use of hybrid efficacy-effectiveness designs to assess the impact of treatment preference on outcome.     

Parent Cognitions as Predictors of Child Treatment Response in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Using a subsample of 105 children and their parents (100 mothers, 57 fathers) from the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (the MTA), the value of parents' baseline cognitions as predictors of children's treatment outcome at 14 months was examined. Measures of parents' cognitions about themselves, their ADHD children, and their parenting, as well as a self-report measure of dysfunctional discipline were included. Both mothers' and fathers' self-reported use of dysfunctional discipline predicted worse child treatment outcome. Low self-esteem in mothers, low parenting efficacy in fathers, and fathers' attributions of noncompliance to their ADHD child's insufficient effort and bad mood also were associated with worse child treatment outcome. All of these predictive relations were obtained even after MTA treatment effects had been taken into account. Secondary analyses indicated that mothers had a more external locus of control, lower self-esteem, lower parenting efficacy, and a greater tendency to attribute noncompliance to their ADHD child's bad mood than did fathers.     

Behavioral versus Behavioral and Pharmacological Treatment in ADHD Children Attending a Summer Treatment Program

As part of the behavioral treatment in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA), children participated in an intensive summer treatment program (STP). This study examined the differences between 57 children in the combined treatment (Comb) group, who were medicated, and 60 children in the behavioral treatment (Beh) group, who were unmedicated throughout the STP. Comb children were significantly better than Beh on 5 measures: rule following, good sportsmanship, peer negative nominations, and STP teacher posttreatment ratings of inattention/overactivity. Groups did not differ on any of the other 30 measures, and responded similarly to the STP over time. Comparisons to normative data revealed that Comb children were more likely to fall within the normative range on 6 measures. The differences between these results and the main MTA results, in which Comb was always superior to Beh, are discussed in terms of the relative intensity of combined treatments. The implications for future studies of pharmacological and behavioral treatment for ADHD are discussed.     

Maternal Depressive Symptomatology and Parenting Behavior: Exploration of Possible Mediators

Possible mediators of the relation between maternal depressive symptomatology and parenting behavior were examined for 96 children with ADHD and their mothers drawn from the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA) as part of an add-on investigation conducted by two of the six MTA sites. General cognitions (i.e., maternal locus of control and self-esteem) and parenting-specific factors (i.e., maternal parenting efficacy and parenting stress) were examined as possible mediators. Findings provide initial support that maternal parenting stress, as well as maternal locus of control and self-esteem mediate the relation between maternal depressive symptomatology and parenting behavior. This provides support for the argument that some families of children with ADHD may benefit from an expanded version of parent management training that includes sessions directly targeting affective and cognitive factors in parents, similar to treatment programs used to treat childhood conduct problems.     

Anxiety as a Predictor and Outcome Variable in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA)

Initial moderator analyses in the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA) suggested that child anxiety ascertained by parent report on the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children 2.3 (DISC Anxiety) differentially moderated the outcome of treatment. Left unanswered were questions regarding the nature of DISC Anxiety, the impact of comorbid conduct problems on the moderating effect of DISC Anxiety, and the clinical significance of DISC Anxiety as a moderator of treatment outcome. Thirty-three percent of MTA subjects met DSM-III-R criteria for an anxiety disorder excluding simple phobias. Of these, two-thirds also met DSM-III-R criteria for comorbid oppositional-defiant or conduct disorder whereas one-third did not, yielding an odds ratio of approximately two for DISC Anxiety, given conduct problems. In this context, exploratory analyses of baseline data suggest that DISC Anxiety may reflect parental attributions regarding child negative affectivity and associated behavior problems (unlike fearfulness), particularly in the area of social interactions, another core component of anxiety that is more typically associated with phobic symptoms. Analyses using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) indicate that the moderating effect of DISC Anxiety continues to favor the inclusion of psychosocial treatment for anxious ADHD children irrespective of the presence or absence of comorbid conduct problems. This effect, which is clinically meaningful, is confined primarily to parent-reported outcomes involving disruptive behavior, internalizing symptoms, and inattention; and is generally stronger for combined than unimodal treatment. Contravening earlier studies, no adverse effect of anxiety on medication response for core ADHD or other outcomes in anxious or nonanxious ADHD children was demonstrated. When treating ADHD, it is important to search for comorbid anxiety and negative affectivity and to adjust treatment strategies accordingly.     

Psychosocial Treatment Strategies in the MTA Study: Rationale, Methods, and Critical Issues in Design and Implementation

The Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the MTA, is the first multisite, cooperative agreement treatment study of children, and the largest psychiatric/psychological treatment trial ever conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health. It examines the effectiveness of Medication vs. Psychosocial treatment vs. their combination for treatment of ADHD and compares these experimental arms to each other and to routine community care. In a parallel group design, 579 (male and female) ADHD children, aged 7–9 years, 11 months, were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental arms, and then received 14 months of prescribed treatment (or community care) with periodic reassessments. After delineating the theoretical and empirical rationales for Psychosocial treatment of ADHD, we describe the MTA's Psychosocial Treatment strategy applied to all children in two of the four experimental arms (Psychosocial treatment alone; Combined treatment). Psychosocial treatment consisted of three major components: a Parent Training component, a two-part School Intervention component, and a child treatment component anchored in an intensive Summer Treatment Program. Components were selected based on evidence of treatment efficacy and because they address comprehensive symptom targets, settings, comorbidities, and functional domains. We delineate key conceptual and logistical issues faced by clinical researchers in design and implementation of Psychosocial research with examples of how these issues were addressed in the MTA study.Deceased     

Relation Between Outcomes on a Continuous Performance Test and ADHD Symptoms Over Time

This study examined the relationship between the developmental trajectories of neuropsychological functioning and ADHD symptomatology in a longitudinal sample of children ages 9 to 14. Participants and measures were derived from the Multimodal Treatment Study for ADHD including 534MTA participants and 254 normal controls. Despite improvement over time, MTA participants continued to receive higher ratings of ADHD symptomatology and exhibit greater difficulties across the majority of neuropsychological outcomes. No relations were found between improvements in neuropsychological functioning and ADHD symptomatology over time. Findings provide support for the persistence of neuropsychological functioning and ADHD symptomatology. Findings did not support the hypothesized relation between improvements in frontally-mediated neuropsychological functioning and ADHD symptomatology possibly due to the brief 1-year lag and limited assessment battery. Findings are discussed in relation to neuropsychological development including recommendations for future research.     

Parenting and Family Stress Treatment Outcomes in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): An Empirical Analysis in the MTA Study

Parenting and family stress treatment outcomes in the MTA study were examined. Male and female (579), 7–9-year-old children with combined type Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), were recruited at six sites around the United States and Canada, and randomly assigned to one of four groups: intensive, multi-faceted behavior therapy program alone (Beh); carefully titrated and monitored medication management strategy alone (MedMgt); a well-integrated combination of the two (Comb); or a community comparison group (CC). Treatment occurred over 14 months, and assessments were taken at baseline, 3, 9, and 14 months. Parenting behavior and family stress were assessed using parent-report and child-report inventories. Results showed that Beh alone, MedMgt alone, and Comb produced significantly greater decreases in a parent-rated measure of negative parenting, Negative/Ineffective Discipline, than did standard community treatment. The three MTA treatments did not differ significantly from each other on this domain. No differences were noted among the four groups on positive parenting or on family stress variables. Results are discussed in terms of the theoretical and empirically documented importance of negative parenting in the symptoms, comorbidities and long-term outcomes of ADHD.     

基于时间顺序的多动症共病的概述

多动症是一种常见的行为障碍,它以注意力不集中、多动、行为冲动为主要特征。同时多动症是一组异质性疾病,常与一种或几种精神或非精神障碍相伴发生。以往关于多动症合并症状的研究,大都局限在一个或几个合并症状上,缺乏关于其合并症状的系统认识。基于以往研究,文章以多动症合并症状发生的时间顺序为线索,将其分为前期、同期、后期合并症,并逐一详细介绍。未来应该加强关于多动症患者的纵向研究,以了解症状的发展状况,更好的诊断和治疗多动症。     

Exploration of the Factor Structure of ADHD in Adolescence through Self,Parent, and Teacher Reports of Symptomatology

Factor analytic studies of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adults have shown that second-order and bifactor models better represent ADHD symptoms than two- or three-factor models, yet there is far less evidence for a bestfitting model of ADHD in adolescence. Thus, the current study examined the factor structure of ADHD in adolescence and further evaluated the external validity of the best fitting model. Participants were 588 adolescents (22 % female; 366 with a childhood ADHD diagnosis; mean age 15.9 years) from the 8-year assessment of the Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (MTA). ADHD symptoms were assessed via adolescent self-report, parent report, and teacher report on the SNAP-IV scale. Potential factor structures for the 18 symptoms of ADHD were tested for each informant, which included traditional one-factor, two-factor, and three-factor models of ADHD, as well as second-order factor (specific factors loading onto general factor) and bifactor (items loading onto both specific and general factors) models. Unique associations between external criteria and the identified factors of each informant’s best fitting model were examined. Although several of the proposed models exhibited good fit, the second-order two-factor model best accounted for ADHD in adolescence according to self-report and parent report, and the second-order three-factor model was optimal according to teacher report. Several key measurement issues emerged for the hierarchical bifactor models, such as numerous Heywood cases and out-of-bound parameter estimates, which rendered them unfit as optimal representations of ADHD in adolescence. These findings and the implications of the best fitting model of ADHD in adolescence suggest that a possible reorganization of this disorder may eventually aid clinicians in the accurate diagnosis of ADHD in adolescents.     

Clinical,Sociobiological, and Cognitive Predictors of ADHD Persistence in Children Followed Prospectively Over Time

With increasing awareness that ADHD is chronically disabling, a burgeoning literature has examined childhood clinical indicators of ADHD persistence. This study investigates whether childhood factors reflecting biological risk and cognitive reserve have additive predictive value for the persistence of ADHD that is unique beyond childhood indicators of disorder severity. One-hundred thirty children with ADHD (mean age = 8.9 years, 75 % male) were followed into adolescence (mean age = 14.0 years). Childhood ADHD and co-morbidities were assessed via interviews with parents and teachers; parental psychopathology was assessed via parent interview; exposure to neurobiological and psychosocial adversity were indexed by parent questionnaire; and cognitive reserve was evaluated through children’s performance on measures of IQ and executive functioning. Univariate analyses identified childhood inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity, co-morbid oppositional defiant disorder, overall impairment, and paternal anxiety and depression as more prevalent amongst adolescents with persistent compared with remitted ADHD. Only child-level predictors remained significant in a final multivariate model. These results suggest that children who are most likely to experience persistent ADHD have a more severe clinical presentation in childhood, reflected by increased levels of inattention, oppositional behavior, and impairment. They also are more likely to have fathers with internalizing concerns, but these concerns do not uniquely predict ADHD persistence beyond child-level factors. Contrary to expectations, childhood adversity and cognitive functioning did not predict the course of ADHD.     

Interventions to Address the Academic Impairment of Children and Adolescents with ADHD

There exists a strong link between ADHD and academic underachievement. Both the core behavioral symptoms of ADHD and associated executive functioning deficits likely contribute to academic impairment. Current evidence-based approaches to the treatment of ADHD (i.e., stimulant medication, clinical behavior therapy and classroom behavioral interventions) have demonstrated a robust impact on behavioral variables such as attention and disruptive behavior within classroom analogue settings; however, their efficacy in improving academic outcomes is much less clear. Although surprisingly few treatment outcome studies of ADHD have attempted to incorporate interventions that specifically target academic outcomes, the studies that are available suggest that these interventions may be beneficial. The state of the treatment literature for addressing academic impairment in children and adolescents with ADHD will be reviewed herein, as well as limitations of current research, and directions for future research.     

Non-stimulant treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Stimulants are a highly efficacious and safe treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with 75% to 90% of patients responding well if two different stimulants (amphetamine and methylphenidate) are used. Nonetheless, a subset of ADHD patients will either fail to respond to stimulants or have side effects that preclude their use (tics, severe loss of appetite, marked insomnia). For such patients, there are a number of non-stimulant agents that serve as second-line treatments. Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are the most studied of these drugs. They are superior to placebo in the treatment of ADHD and may reduce abnormal movements in patients with ADHD/tic disorder. TCAs often produce side effects of sedation, dry mouth, and constipation. Bupropion is superior to placebo in the treatment of ADHD and has a more favorable side-effect profile than the TCAs. A new selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, atomoxetine, has been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of ADHD and has recently received an approvable letter from the Food and Drug Administration. The a-agonists clonidine and guanfacine have also been used as alternative agents in ADHD, though the controlled data are more limited. A recent controlled clinical trial suggests a combination of methylphenidate and clonidine has advantages in the treatment of comorbid ADHD and tics over either medication alone. Clinical guidelines for each of these agents, as well as their use in combination with stimulants in comorbid conditions, will be discussed.