Search

ADHD is a common neurodevelopmental disorder with a pediatric prevalence of 5.2%.While medication treatment for ADHD is effective, it does not address all symptoms and a small but notable subgroup does not respond to medications. Adverse effects limit its use and some parents and participants resist use of medication. Thus, limitations of medication treatment for ADHD motivate searching for other therapeutic options. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has been suggested as a treatment for children with ADHD, with mixed results to date. Protocol variables employed, including combined use of cognitive training (CT) and scheduling of sessions, may explain diverse findings to date. The aim of this study was to examine safety, feasibility and efficacy of tDCS combined with CT provided three-times-per week for one-month to treat children with ADHD.In a double blind, randomized, sham-controlled pilot study, 25 children with ADHD were randomized to receive 12 sessions of either anodal tDCS or sham-tDCS for 20 min combined with CT three-times-per-week for four weeks. The tDCS anode was over left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and cathode over vertex. Assessments were obtained prior to, after 6 sessions, 12 sessions and one-month after intervention.No significant post-intervention differences were found between those receiving tDCS or sham-tDCS. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement on questionnaire measures of ADHD and executive function with mixed results seen on computerized performance measures. Overall, adverse effects were mild with no significant difference between groups. However, three children, all from the tDCS group, experienced headaches with two requiring temporary cessation and one requiring removal from the study.Anodal tDCS to the DLPFC using the above protocol in children with ADHD did not demonstrate additional treatment benefits beyond that of CT.

We aimed to examine family quality of life (FQOL) of Northern Israeli families having a child with a severe neurodevelopmental disability and its relation to socio-demographics. The cohort included caregivers of 70 children ages (mean ± standard deviation) 5.36 ± 3.53 years. Families were two-parent (85.7%), lived in the periphery (67.1%) and included Jews (60%), Muslims (18.6%), Druze (14.3%) and Christians (7.1%). Religiosity included: secular (38.6%), traditional (31.4%), religious (30%). Children's diagnosis included autistic spectrum disorder (41.4%), intellectual disability (21.4%), cerebral palsy (17.1%), genetic syndromes (17.1%) and sensorineural hearing loss (2.9%). Degree of support (1-minimal,5-greatest) required by the child was 3.67 ± 1.28 for physical and 3.49 ± 1.36 for communication. Primary caregivers completed the FQOL Survey. Domain scores were highest for family relations and lowest for financial well-being. Dimension scores were highest for importance and lowest for opportunities. Overall FQOL approximated average. Jewish families and residents of a major urban area reported higher and more religious families reported lower overall FQOL. Regression analysis found ethnicity contributing to overall FQOL and domain scores with residence contributing to support from services. Ethnicity and child dependence contributed to dimension scores. Northern Israeli families having a child with a severe neurodevelopmental disability report average FQOL scores. However, family and child dependence characteristics affect FQOL scores. Professionals working with these families should consider FQOL information when making recommendations.