Self-rated costs and benefits of conventional and alternative adult ADHD treatments

Abstract

Abstract Conventional treatments offered by healthcare providers for adult ADHD include pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches or a combination of both. Both treatment types may have downsides like side effects or low efficacy, potentially leading to treatment dissatisfaction. Also, adults with ADHD explore non-prescribed, complementary and/or alternative medicine (CAM) on their initiative, including substances such as dietary supplements and activities such as physical exercise. This survey study aimed to investigate the types of conventional and CAM treatments adults with ADHD use and their self-rated effectiveness. Also, lifetime experience of negative effects across all treatment types and the motives to use CAM were explored. In total, 227 adults diagnosed with ADHD or reporting clinically elevated ADHD symptoms (without official ADHD diagnosis) were included in the analyses. Both lifetime and current use and experiencing negative effects were highest for conventional pharmacological treatments, followed by CAM activities, CAM substances, and conventional non-pharmacological approaches. The most common reason for using CAM was overall well-being. Conventional treatments were rated more effective in influencing cognition than CAM, but their self-rated effectiveness did not differ in other assessed domains. CAM activities were rated more effective than CAM substances in all assessed domains. This study highlights the high prevalence of CAM use by adults with ADHD, implying that some patients find value in such alternative treatments. Future studies should consider investigating alternative and/or complementary treatments for adult ADHD, alone or in combination with conventional treatments.

Keywords

• Adult ADHD
• Treatments
• Conventional
• Alternative
• Self-rated effectiveness