October 16, 2021

Swedish nationwide population study explores links between ADHD and physical ailments

What are the links between ADHD and physical ailments in adults? And, where such links exist, how can we tease out where they are due to genetics, shared environment, or unshared environmental influences?

An international research team used the Swedish population and health registers to explore these links in an entire national population. They were able to do this because Sweden has a single-payer national health insurance system, cross-referenced with the population and other national registries through personal identification numbers.

This study identified full-sibling and maternal half-sibling pairs born from 1932 through 1995, through the Population and Multi-Generation Registers. This yielded a total of 4,789,799 individuals - consisting of 3,819,207 full-sibling pairs and 469,244 maternal half-sibling pairs, and 1,841,303family clusters (siblings, parents, cousins, spouses). Roughly half were men, the other half women.

After adjusting for sex and birth year, those with ADHD were at significantly higher risk of a wide range of physical ailments, when compared with individuals without ADHD:

·        Over four times as likely to have sleep disorders or develop alcohol-related liver disease;
·        Roughly three times as likely to develop the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, epilepsy, and fatty liver disease;

·        Over two and a half times more likely to become obese.

Overall, ADHD was significantly associated with 34 of the 35 physical diseases studied, rheumatoid arthritis being the only exception.

Comparing men with women, women with ADHD were at significantly greater risk of atrial fibrillation, urolithiasis, sleep disorders, and asthma than men with ADHD. Conversely, men with ADHD faced a greater risk of thyroid disorder than women with ADHD.

Between-sibling analyses showed that full siblings of individuals with ADHD were at significantly increased risk for 27 of the 35 physical ailments, suggesting that shared familial factors contributed to the co-occurrence of the conditions. This remained true even after adjusting for the occurrence of ADHD in full siblings.

These associations were generally reduced in maternal half-siblings of individuals with ADHD. The associations between full-siblings were significantly stronger than between maternal half-siblings for type 1 diabetes, obesity, kidney infections, back or spine pain, migraine, sleep disorders, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Keep in mind that full-siblings on average share half of their genes, whereas maternal half-siblings share only a quarter of their genes. Maternal (as opposed to paternal) half-siblings were chosen as a basis for comparison because they are typically brought up together in the same family setting, and thus are similar to full-siblings in having a shared family environment. Reduced risk in maternal half-siblings would therefore signal a genetic component to the risk.

Given that ADHD is itself a nervous system disorder, it is unsurprising that it correlated most strongly with other nervous system disorders, with a medium effect size (r=.23). Genetic factors explained over a quarter of the correlation, shared environmental factors over a seventh, and non-shared environmental factors the other three-fifths. The latter could point to environmental risk factors that influence both ADHD and nervous system diseases.

Small-to-medium correlations were found with metabolic, respiratory, and musculoskeletal disease groups, with genetic factors explaining roughly two-thirds of the correlation, and non-shared environmental factors most of the rest.

The authors concluded that "adults with ADHD are at increased risk of a range of physical conditions, across circulatory, metabolic, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, musculoskeletal, nervous system, respiratory, and skin diseases. Most physical conditions showed familial associations with ADHD (mainly from genetic factors). Our findings highlight the need for rigorous medical assessment and care in adult patients with ADHD, and suggest long-term consequences of age-related diseases."

Ebba Du Rietz, Isabell Brickell, AgnieszkaButwicka, Marica Leone, Zheng Chang, Samuele Cortese, Brian M D'Onofrio, Catharina A Hartman, Paul Lichtenstein, Stephen V Faraone, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Henrik Larsson, "Mapping phenotypic and aetiological associations between ADHD and physical conditions in adulthood in Sweden: a genetically informed register study," Lancet Psychiatry (2021), vol. 8, issue 9, 774-783, published online, https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00171-1.

Related posts

No items found.

Meta-analysis Finds Little Evidence in Support of Game-based Digital Interventions for ADHD

ADHD treatment usually involves a combination of medication and behavioral therapy. However, medication can cause side effects, adherence problems, and resistance from patients or caregivers. 

Numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have evaluated the effects of non-pharmacological interventions on ADHD. With little research specifically examining game-based interventions for children and adolescents with ADHD or conducting meta-analyses to quantify their treatment effectiveness, a Korean study team performed a systematic search of the peer-reviewed medical literature to do just that.  

The Study: 

To be included, studies had to be randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD. The team excluded RCTs that included participants with psychiatric conditions other than ADHD.  

Eight studies met these standards. Four had a high risk of bias.  

Meta-analysis of four RCTs with a combined total of 481 participants reported no significant improvements in either working memory or inhibition from game-based digital interventions relative to controls. 

Likewise, meta-analysis of three RCTs encompassing 160 children and adolescents found no significant improvement in shifting tasks relative to controls. 

And meta-analysis of two RCTs combining 131 participants reported no significant gains in initiating, planning, organizing, and monitoring abilities, nor in emotional control

The only positive results were from two RCTs with only 90 total participants that indicated some improvement in visuospatial short-term memory and visuospatial working memory.  

There was no indication of effect size, because the team used mean differences instead of standardized mean differences.  

Conclusion:

The team concluded, “The meta-analysis revealed that game-based interventions significantly improved cognitive functions: (a) visuospatial short-term memory … and (b) visuospatial working memory … However, effects on behavioral aspects such as inhibition and monitoring … were not statistically significant, suggesting limited behavioral improvement following the interventions.” 

Simply put, the current evidence does not support the effectiveness of game-based interventions in improving behavioral symptoms of ADHD in children and adolescents. The only positive results were from two studies with a small combined sample size, which does not qualify as a genuine meta-analysis. All the other meta-analyses performed with larger sample sizes reported no benefits. 

Understanding Teen Health and Well-being in ADHD: A Fresh Perspective from the CDC

Recent research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) highlights distinct health and social-emotional challenges faced by teens diagnosed with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). This study, published in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, offers critical insights directly from the teens themselves, providing a unique view often missed when relying solely on parent or clinical reports. 

Researchers analyzed nationally representative data from July 2021 through December 2022, comparing self-reported experiences of teens aged 12 to 17 with and without ADHD. Approximately 10% of teenagers had an ADHD diagnosis, and the findings reveal specific areas where teens with ADHD face notable difficulties. 

Teenagers with ADHD reported significantly higher rates of bullying victimization and struggles in making friends compared to their peers. Surprisingly, they were less likely to report a lack of peer support, suggesting complexities in how they perceive friendships and social networks. The study underscores the importance of directly engaging teens in assessing their social relationships, rather than solely relying on parental perspectives. 

Sleep difficulties emerged as another critical issue for teens with ADHD. About 80% reported problems like difficulty waking up and irregular wake times, markedly higher than their non-ADHD counterparts. Such disruptions can exacerbate attention difficulties and emotional regulation issues, further complicating daily life for these teens. 

Excessive screen time also stood out, with nearly two-thirds of teens with ADHD spending over four hours daily on screens, excluding schoolwork. This high screen usage is concerning, given its potential negative impact on physical and mental health, including sleep quality and social interactions. 

Notably, the study found no significant differences in physical activity levels or concerns about weight between teens with and without ADHD. This finding contrasts with previous studies that have highlighted lower physical activity among children with ADHD, suggesting the need for continued research on how physical activity is measured and encouraged in this population. 

The study’s authors emphasize the importance of health promotion interventions tailored specifically for teens with ADHD. By directly engaging teens and considering their unique perspectives, interventions can better address social-emotional well-being and healthy lifestyle behaviors, ultimately improving long-term outcomes for this vulnerable group. 

Overall, this research provides compelling evidence for healthcare providers, educators, and families to focus on supporting teens with ADHD in areas of social skills, sleep hygiene, and healthy screen time habits. Such targeted support can significantly enhance the quality of life and health outcomes for adolescents navigating the challenges of ADHD. 

Meta-analysis Reports No Significant Evidence for Efficacy of Neuromechanistic Treatments for Adult ADHD

The Background on ADHD Treatments, rTMS and tDCS:

Methylphenidate is known as the gold-standard treatment for ADHD, increasing dopamine concentrations and helping to focus. However, these psychostimulants may be less well-tolerated in adults. Adverse effects include decreased appetite, nausea, racing heartbeat, restlessness, nervousness, and insomnia. 

Neurofeedback is a non-pharmaceutical treatment that combines cognitive behavioral therapy techniques like conditioning and positive reinforcement with electroencephalography (EEG) feedback. Electrodes are placed on specific brain areas, guiding patients to regulate their brainwave activity. 

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) uses electromagnetism to induce an electric field by passing a magnetic field through the scalp. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), on the other hand, directly applies an electric current through the scalp. Both repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and tDCS primarily target the outermost layers of neurons, as they are non-invasive methods. Nevertheless, both techniques are believed to affect deeper layers through interconnected neuronal networks.  

The Study:

A French research team conducted a systematic search of the peer-reviewed medical literature to perform a meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of these experimental treatment techniques. 

Eight studies – four using rTMS and another four using tDCS – met the inclusion criteria. Studies had to be randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and had to involve multiple sessions of treatment. Participants had to be adults previously diagnosed with ADHD.  

Outcomes were measured through self-rated scales, neuropsychological tests, and electrophysiological pre-post evaluations. 

Separate meta-analyses of the four tDCS RCTs combining 154 participants and of the four rTMS RCTs encompassing 149 participants likewise reported no significant improvements. In all cases variation in outcomes between studies was moderate, and there were no signs of publication bias. 

The Conclusion on Neuromechanistic Treatments for ADHD:

Meta-analysis of all eight studies with a combined total of 421 participants reported no significant improvements over controls. Narrowing down to studies that used sham controls likewise produced no significant improvements. So, despite the title of this study, these neuromechanistic treatments do not appear to be the future of treatment for adult ADHD.