Nonstimulant Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Adults: Systematic R...
Nonstimulant Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
About this item
Full title
Author / Creator
Publisher
Cham: Springer International Publishing
Journal title
Language
English
Formats
Publication information
Publisher
Cham: Springer International Publishing
Subjects
More information
Scope and Contents
Contents
Background
For some adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), nonstimulants need to be considered either as a monotherapy or as an adjunct to stimulants.
Objectives
The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to assess the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of nonstimulants in adults with ADHD.
Methods
Data sources, searches, and study selection were based on a previously published network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) by Cortese at al. (Lancet Psychiatry 5(9):727–738, 2018), which we updated in March 2022. Specifically, we searched PubMed, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, OpenGrey, Web of Science Core Collection, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (UK and Ireland), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (abstracts and international), and the WHO International Trials Registry Platform, including ClinicalTrials.gov for double-blind RCTs with a placebo arm, lasting at least one week, including adults with a diagnosis of ADHD based on DSM-III, DSM-III-R, DSM-IV(TR), DSM-5 or ICD-9- or 10, and reporting data on efficacy, tolerability (drop-out due to side effects) and acceptability (drop-out due to any cause) of guanfacine, clonidine, or atomoxetine. Additionally, we searched for RCTs of viloxazine extended release (ER), approved for ADHD in 2021. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, and the risk of bias for individual RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
Results
We included 18 studies in the meta-analyses (4308 participants) plus one additional study in the narrative synthesis (374 participants). The meta-analysis showed that atomoxetine (15 RCTs) (Hedge’s
g
= − 0.48, 95% CI [− 0.64; − 0.33]), guanfacine (two RCTs) (Hedge’s
g
= − 0.66, 95% CI [− 0.94; − 0.38]) and viloxazine ER (one RCT) were significantly more efficacious than placebo. Atomoxetine was less well tolerated than placebo, while tolerability of guanfacine and viloxazine ER could not be meta-analysed, since only one study, for each medication, reported on it.
Conclusions
All investigated nonstimulants were more efficacious in the treatment of ADHD in adults, than placebo, while the placebo had better acceptability and tolerability.
Protocol
https://osf.io/5vnmt/?view_only=2bf87ed12ba94645babedceeee4c0120
....
Alternative Titles
Full title
Nonstimulant Medications for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Authors, Artists and Contributors
Identifiers
Primary Identifiers
Record Identifier
TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2812507791
Permalink
https://devfeature-collection.sl.nsw.gov.au/record/TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2812507791
Other Identifiers
ISSN
1172-7047
E-ISSN
1179-1934
DOI
10.1007/s40263-023-01005-8