Stimulant Medication and Reading Performance: Follow-up on Sustained Dose in ADHD Boys with and Without Conduct Disorders

• Published in: Journal of learning disabilities 1992-02, Vol.25 (2), p.115-123
• Main Authors: Forness, Steven R., Swanson, James M., Cantwell, Dennis P., Youpa, Daniel, Hanna, Gregory L.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Achievement; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity - drug therapy; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity - psychology; Attention Deficit Disorders; Behavior Disorders; Biological and medical sciences; Child; Communication disorders; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Drug Therapy; Elementary Education; Humans; Hyperactivity; Maintenance; Male; Males; Medical sciences; Methylphenidate; Methylphenidate - administration & dosage; Neuropharmacology; Performance Factors; Pharmacology. Drug treatments; Psychoanaleptics: cns stimulant, antidepressant agent, nootropic agent, mood stabilizer..., (alzheimer disease); Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychopharmacology; Reading; Reading Achievement; Reading Comprehension; Reading Improvement
• ISSN: 0022-2194; 1538-4780
• DOI: 10.1177/002221949202500205

The study examined the sustained effects of methylphenidate on reading performance in a sample of 42 boys, ages 8 to 11, with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Two subgroups were formed based on the presence or absence of co-occurring conduct disorders. Subjects were selected on the basis of their positive response to methylphenidate as determined in a series of original medication trials (Forness, Cantwell, Swanson, Hanna, & Youpa, 1991). For the purpose of this study, subjects were placed on their optimal dose of medication for a 6-week period and then tested on measures of oral reading and reading comprehension equivalent to those used in the original trials, retested after a week without medication (placebo), then tested again the following week after return to medication. Only the subgroup with conduct disorders responded, and this response was limited to reading comprehension improvement in only those subjects who also demonstrated improvement in oral reading on original trials. No response differences were found between subjects with or without learning disabilities.