| Literature DB >> 31958908 |
Jeewon Lee1, Areum Lee1, Ji-Hoon Kim2, Yun Mi Shin3, Seong-Ju Kim3, Woo Dong Cho3, Soyoung Irene Lee1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of omega-3 and Korean red ginseng on improving attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and cognitive function in children with ADHD.Entities:
Keywords: Attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity; Child; Ginseng.; Omega-3
Year: 2020 PMID: 31958908 PMCID: PMC7006981 DOI: 10.9758/cpn.2020.18.1.75
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Psychopharmacol Neurosci ISSN: 1738-1088 Impact factor: 2.582
Baseline characteristics of the participants (n = 40)
| Characteristic | Data |
|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 8.00 ± 1.45 |
| Sex | |
| Male | 31 (77.5) |
| Female | 9 (22.5) |
| School year | |
| 1st grade | 11 (27.5) |
| 2nd grade | 13 (32.5) |
| 3rd grade | 7 (17.5) |
| 4th grade | 5 (12.5) |
| 5th grade | 3 (7.5) |
| 6th grade | 1 (2.5) |
| ADHD type | |
| Inattentive | 16 (40.0) |
| Hyperactive/impulsive | 1 (2.5) |
| Combined | 23 (57.5) |
| Baseline ADHD-RS | 31.45 ± 8.77 |
| Baseline CGI-S | 3.43 ± 1.20 |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation or number (%).
ADHD, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; ADHD-RS, ADHD- Rating Scale; CGI-S, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity.
Change in ADHD-RS and CGI-S scores
| Scale | Baseline | Week 2 | Week 6 | Week 12 | ES | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ADHD-RS | ||||||
| Total | 31.45 ± 8.77 | 28.95 ± 11.35 | 26.13 ± 11.96 | 24.75 ± 11.08 | 20.63 | 1.45 |
| Inattention | 18.35 ± 5.20 | 17.08 ± 6.40 | 15.40 ± 6.81 | 14.63 ± 6.52 | 18.45 | 1.38 |
| Hyperactivity | 13.10 ± 6.16 | 11.88 ± 6.53 | 10.73 ± 6.42 | 10.13 ± 6.09 | 13.94 | 1.11 |
| CGI-S | 3.43 ± 1.20 | 3.25 ± 1.03 | 2.98 ± 0.97 | 3.00 ± 1.04 | 11.36 | 1.08 |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
ADHD-RS, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder-Rating Scale; CGI-S, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity; ES, effect size.
p < 0.05,
p < 0.001; in relation to baseline (Bonferroni’s post-test).
ES was calculated as Cohen’s d (0.8 = large, 0.5 = medium, and 0.2 = small).
Baseline and endpoint results of neuropsychological tests
| Test | Baseline | Endpoint | ES | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPT | ||||
| Visual | ||||
| Omission errors | 73.94 ± 20.13 | 76.00 ± 20.17 | −0.57 | 0.10 |
| Commission errors | 83.29 ± 18.57 | 73.68 ± 22.25 | 4.14 | 0.71 |
| Reaction time | 52.06 ± 15.07 | 59.21 ± 14.80 | −3.60 | 0.62 |
| Reaction time variability | 70.09 ± 17.51 | 71.68 ± 18.11 | −0.502 | 0.09 |
| Auditory | ||||
| Omission errors | 66.79 ± 21.11 | 69.74 ± 21.92 | −0.90 | 0.15 |
| Commission errors | 70.59 ± 21.65 | 65.09 ± 18.19 | 2.03 | 0.35 |
| Reaction time | 41.41 ± 15.90 | 44.06 ± 14.04 | −1.33 | 0.23 |
| Reaction time variability | 50.68 ± 14.59 | 52.50 ± 12.92 | −0.70 | 0.12 |
| AVLT | ||||
| Immediate recall | 10.35 ± 2.64 | 12.76 ± 3.17 | −5.01 | 0.86 |
| Delayed recall | 8.85 ± 3.10 | 10.21 ± 3.56 | −2.78 | 0.48 |
| Delayed recognition | 10.15 ± 2.88 | 9.79 ± 2.91 | 0.79 | 0.14 |
| CFT | ||||
| Drawing | 8.12 ± 2.84 | 8.32 ± 2.80 | −0.47 | 0.08 |
| Immediate recall | 8.74 ± 2.78 | 10.74 ± 3.50 | −3.50 | 0.60 |
| Delayed recall | 8.85 ± 2.90 | 10.29 ± 3.65 | −2.48 | 0.43 |
| SWCT | ||||
| Color | 9.24 ± 3.37 | 9.35 ± 3.37 | −0.268 | 0.05 |
| Word | 8.71 ± 3.13 | 9.56 ± 3.67 | −1.70 | 0.31 |
| Color–Word | 8.79 ± 3.40 | 9.76 ± 3.02 | −2.23 | 0.38 |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
ES, effect size; CPT, Continuous Performance Test; AVLT, Auditory Verbal Learning Test; CFT, Complex Figure Test; SWCT, Stroop Color–Word Test.
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01,
p < 0.001.
ES was calculated as Cohen’s d (0.8 = large, 0.5 = medium, and 0.2 = small).