Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), is diagnosed when children display persistent age-inappropriate symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity. Since ADHD is one of the most common (3% to 5%) childhood mental disorder, a lot of controversies debated whether behavioral therapy (BT) or medication alone (MM) would be more efficient as the treatment for ADHD (Arnold et al., 1997, p.865). In 1992, the Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (the MTA), which was the first multi-site cooperative agreement treatment study, was sponsored by National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). The main focus of the study was to discover the relative advantages of medication (MM) versus behavioral therapy alone (BT)
…show more content…
Whilst both treatments began concurrently, the medication titration trial was introduced before the behavioral intervention was being implemented. Last, the community group were originally established as the “no treatment” group. Nevertheless, it would have been unethical not to treat the subjects for 14 months. Hence, subjects were allowed to get any types of help in the community. Almost 70% of the community group received medication from community physicians; whereas, more than 90% of the parents and teachers reported using behavioral techniques with the referred children (Pelham, 1999, …show more content…
First, the effectiveness of BT and MM were measured while BT treatment had faded for 4 to 6 months but MM treatment was active (Pelham, 1999, p.984). The fading of BT group could also be inconsistent since teachers and parents were having diverse rate of compliance on implementing the strategies that they learned (Pelham, 1999, p.987). Yet, it was obvious that measuring the effectiveness of MM group while the treatment was inactive would be pointless since medication was well known for not having lasting effect upon discontinuation. Besides, the state-of-the-art behavioral therapy in the BT group with such great intensity and commitment should not expect subjects to continue after a long term; whereas, the patients anticipated to persistently take medications to retain their mental
Whilst both treatments began concurrently, the medication titration trial was introduced before the behavioral intervention was being implemented. Last, the community group were originally established as the “no treatment” group. Nevertheless, it would have been unethical not to treat the subjects for 14 months. Hence, subjects were allowed to get any types of help in the community. Almost 70% of the community group received medication from community physicians; whereas, more than 90% of the parents and teachers reported using behavioral techniques with the referred children (Pelham, 1999, …show more content…
First, the effectiveness of BT and MM were measured while BT treatment had faded for 4 to 6 months but MM treatment was active (Pelham, 1999, p.984). The fading of BT group could also be inconsistent since teachers and parents were having diverse rate of compliance on implementing the strategies that they learned (Pelham, 1999, p.987). Yet, it was obvious that measuring the effectiveness of MM group while the treatment was inactive would be pointless since medication was well known for not having lasting effect upon discontinuation. Besides, the state-of-the-art behavioral therapy in the BT group with such great intensity and commitment should not expect subjects to continue after a long term; whereas, the patients anticipated to persistently take medications to retain their mental