The role of executive functions in mediating the relationship between adult ADHD symptoms and hyperfocus in university students.

BACKGROUND: Hyperfocus, a state of intense, narrow and prolonged attentional focus, has been associated with symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in both clinical and non-clinical populations. Hyperfocus may be explained by difficulties in executive control, typically observed in ADHD. AIMS: To investigate (1) whether ADHD and executive functions (EF) are associated with hyperfocus and (2) whether EF mediate the relationship between ADHD symptoms and hyperfocus. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A non-clinical sample of 380 university students (264 females) completed self-reports of ADHD, EF, hyperfocus and hyperfocus during rewarding activities. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Increased difficulties in EF and severity of ADHD symptoms were significantly and positively correlated with a higher frequency of hyperfocus. Moreover, EF difficulties partially mediated the relationship between ADHD and hyperfocus (after controlling for sex and substance use), but not the relationship between ADHD and hyperfocus during rewarding activities. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Difficulties in EF partially explained the higher frequency of hyperfocus, but not of hyperfocus during rewarding activities, among university students reporting more severe ADHD symptoms. Future research should investigate whether and how specific EF and other ADHD-related neurocognitive difficulties (e.g., reward sensitivity) contribute to various types of hyperfocus experiences in ADHD. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS?: This paper is a first attempt to explain the relationship between adult ADHD symptoms and hyperfocus experiences. Our findings suggest that, although highly correlated, existing self-reports of hyperfocus measure different aspects of this experience: hyperfocus and reward-related hyperfocus. We replicate previous findings that indicated a greater frequency of both types of hyperfocus in ADHD. Additionally, we demonstrate a connection between EF difficulties and different aspects of hyperfocus. Finally, we extend previous findings by proposing that EF difficulties partially explain the relationship between ADHD and hyperfocus, but not the relationship between ADHD and reward-related hyperfocus. We hypothesize that other neurocognitive difficulties (e.g., reward sensitivity) may contribute to explain the relationship between ADHD and different aspects of hyperfocus.

Treatment Efficacy and Clinical Effectiveness of EEG Neurofeedback as a Personalized and Multimodal Treatment in ADHD: A Critical Review.

PURPOSE: Recent reviews have proposed that scientifically validated standard EEG neurofeedback (NF) protocols are an efficacious and specific treatment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Here, we review the current evidence for the treatment efficacy and clinical effectiveness of NF in ADHD to investigate whether NF treatment personalization (standard protocols matched to the electrophysiological features of ADHD) and combination with other interventions (psychosocial, sleep hygiene and nutritional advice) might yield superior long-term treatment outcomes relative to non-personalized NF and medication monotreatments. METHODS: The electronic databases PubMed and PsycINFO were systematically searched using our key terms. Of the 38 resulting studies, 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and open-label studies were eligible for inclusion. Studies were analyzed for effect sizes and remission rates at the end of treatment and at follow-up. The effects of personalized and multimodal NF treatments were compared to non-personalized NF monotreatments and with two benchmark medication studies. RESULTS: The analysis of RCTs indicated that the long-term effects of personalized NF interventions were superior to non-personalized NF and comparable to those of medication alone or in combination with behavioral intervention. The analysis of open-label trials further indicates that the interaction of NF with parental interventions, sleep and nutritional advice might yield superior clinical effectiveness relative to NF and medication monotreatments. CONCLUSION: Personalized and multimodal NF interventions seem to yield superior treatment efficacy relative to NF alone and superior clinical effectiveness relative to medication. We propose that treatment outcomes may be further enhanced by adjusting NF non-specific factors (eg, reinforcement contingencies) to specific ADHD characteristics (eg, reward sensitivity). Future NF research should focus on the systematic evaluation of the treatment outcomes of personalized and multimodal treatments.

Testing the relation between ADHD and hyperfocus experiences.

BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been associated with hyperfocus, a transient experience of enhanced attentional focus and diminished awareness of time and the environment. AIMS: This study aims to investigate the association between the frequency, duration and pervasiveness of hyperfocus across different situations in adults with and without ADHD. METHOD AND PROCEDURES: Within a healthy sample (n = 1124), we analysed correlations between scores on the ADHD Rating Scale and self-reports of frequency, duration and pervasiveness of hyperfocus. An ADHD patient group (n = 78) was compared to matched healthy participants on all hyperfocus variables. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: In healthy adults, the frequency of hyperfocus was positively correlated with ADHD traits; older age and higher education were correlated with fewer hyperfocus occurrences in a smaller number of situations. ADHD patients and matched controls did not differ in the occurrence, frequency, duration and pervasiveness of hyperfocus, but hyperfocus was less likely to occur in educational and social situations in ADHD patients. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Hyperfocus experiences are not specific of ADHD patients. The divergent findings might reflect multiple hyperfocus dimensions (situational and motivational) assessed in different studies which need to be addressed in future research.

UC-USP collaborative exercise on photobiomodulation therapy in neurological orofacial disturbances.

BACKGROUND: Neurosensory peripheral disorders are one of the most common risks associated with iatrogenic and/or post-traumatic injuries. It is often related to disability. Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) is a nonsurgical and safe procedure which can accelerate and improve the regeneration of injured biological tissue. This study aims to analyze the impact of PBMT, in the quality of life and impairment of individuals with orofacial neurological peripheral disturbance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis in the database of the dental traumatology clinic of the Hospital Centre of the University of Coimbra/Faculty of Medicine of the University of Coimbra was performed.5 out of 50 individuals were selected, according to the selection criteria. The neurosensory activity was assessed by a pinprick nociceptive test and the EQ-5D-5L self-report questionnaire was used to analyse the quality of life. The study was performed in two phases:1) inactive laser or placebo phase, for one month and 2) active laser or treatment phase. A diode low-level laser device (SIROLaserBlue;Sirona,Germany) was used, according to our protocol. A collaborative protocol in the PBMT influence in individuals with neurosensory peripheral disturbances was studied. RESULTS: There was no improvement in the neurosensory activity nor in the quality of life, in the placebo phase. After the treatment phase, the EQ-5D-5L final results reported no problems in all of the five dimensions, except for anxiety/depression in individuals with long-standing neurosensory peripheral disturbances. The EQ-VAS scores increased in all the individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Our results supported the improvement of quality of life and impairment reduction in the individuals submitted to PBMT. Key words:Low-level light therapy, peripheral nerve injuries, sensation disorders, quality of life, forensic medicine.

Evaluation of the efficacy of dentin hypersensitivity treatments-A systematic review and follow-up analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the treatments used to treat dentin hypersensitivity (DH), based on its efficacy and effect duration. METHODS: Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials were searched for articles published between 1 January 2008 and 14 November 2018, in English, Portuguese or Spanish, reporting clinical trials, completed and with results. This systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO, number CRD42019121986. RESULTS: Seventy-four randomised clinical trials were included in the systematic review, reporting patients from 16 to 65 years old, with a clinical diagnosis of DH, that evaluate the efficacy of a desensitising product, compared to pre-treatment, used the evaporative method stimulation and the visual analogue scale. These studies evaluated 5366 patients and at least 9167 teeth. Seven follow-up periods were considered corresponding to an immediate, medium or long-time effect. Sixty-six studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Glutaraldehyde with HEMA, glass ionomer cements and Laser present significant immediate (until 7 days) DH reduction. Medium-term (until 1 month) reduction was observed in stannous fluoride, glutaraldehyde with HEMA, hydroxyapatite, glass ionomer cements and Laser groups. Finally, long-term significant reduction was seen at potassium nitrate, arginine, glutaraldehyde with HEMA, hydroxyapatite, adhesive systems, glass ionomer cements and LASER. CONCLUSIONS: All active ingredients show efficacy in DH reduction in different follow-up times. Only in-office treatments are effective in immediate DH reduction, maintaining its efficacy over time. For long-time effects, at-home treatments can also be used. More standardised evaluation protocols should be implemented to increase the robustly of the results.

Neurofeedback as a Treatment Intervention in ADHD: Current Evidence and Practice.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Current traditional treatments for ADHD present serious limitations in terms of long-term maintenance of symptom remission and side effects. Here, we provide an overview of the rationale and scientific evidence of the efficacy of neurofeedback in regulating the brain functions in ADHD. We also review the institutional and professional regulation of clinical neurofeedback implementations. RECENT FINDINGS: Based on meta-analyses and (large multicenter) randomized controlled trials, three standard neurofeedback training protocols, namely theta/beta (TBR), sensori-motor rhythm (SMR), and slow cortical potential (SCP), turn out to be efficacious and specific. However, the practical implementation of neurofeedback as a clinical treatment is currently not regulated. We conclude that neurofeedback based on standard protocols in ADHD should be considered as a viable treatment alternative and suggest that further research is needed to understand how specific neurofeedback protocols work. Eventually, we emphasize the need for standard neurofeedback training for practitioners and binding standards for use in clinical practice.

Neurofeedback of SMR and Beta1 Frequencies: An Investigation of Learning Indices and Frequency-Specific Effects.

Despite evidence that Sensorimotor Rhythm (SMR) and beta1 neurofeedback have distinct cognitive enhancement effects, it remains unclear whether their amplitudes can be independently enhanced. Furthermore, demands for top-down attention control, postural restraint and maintenance of cognitive set processes, all requiring low-beta frequencies, might masquerade as learning and confound interpretation. The feasibility of selectively enhancing SMR and beta1 amplitudes was investigated with the addition of a random frequency control condition that also requires the potentially confounding cognitive processes. A comprehensive approach to assessing neurofeedback learning was undertaken through the calculation of learning indices within- and across-session and pre-to-post baseline. Herein we provide the first demonstration of beta1 within-session amplitude learning that was not attributable to extraneous cognitive processes, for it was not found with random frequency training. On the other hand, within-session SMR learning might have been obscured by high interindividual variability and methodological limitations such as the type of feedback screen, the insufficient number of sessions, and the exclusion of simultaneous theta and high-beta inhibition. Interestingly, SMR and beta1 amplitude increased across sessions in the three groups suggesting unspecific effects of neurofeedback in the low beta frequency band. Moreover, there was no clear evidence of frequency specificity associated with either SMR or beta1 training. Some methodological limitations may underpin the divergent results with previous studies.