Lower Risk Of Abuse Research Articles

Skeletal survey yields in low vs. high risk pediatric patients with skull fractures

BackgroundTo assess for occult fractures, physicians often opt to obtain skeletal surveys (SS) in young, acutely head-injured patients who present with skull fractures. Data informing optimal decision management are lacking. ObjectiveTo determine the positive yields of radiologic SS in young patients with skull fractures presumed to be at low vs. high risk for abuse. Participants and setting476 acutely head injured, skull-fractured patients <3 years hospitalized for intensive care across 18 sites between February 2011 and March 2021. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, secondary analysis of the combined, prospective Pediatric Brain Injury Research Network (PediBIRN) data set. Results204 (43 %) of 476 patients had simple, linear, parietal skull fractures. 272 (57 %) had more complex skull fracture(s). Only 315 (66 %) of 476 patients underwent SS, including 102 (32 %) patients presumed to be at low risk for abuse (patients who presented with a consistent history of accidental trauma; intracranial injuries no deeper than the cortical brain; and no respiratory compromise, alteration or loss of consciousness, seizures, or skin injuries suspicious for abuse). Only one of 102 low risk patients revealed findings indicative of abuse. In two other low risk patients, SS helped to confirm metabolic bone disease. ConclusionsLess than 1 % of low risk patients under three years of age who presented with simple or complex skull fracture(s) revealed other abusive fractures. Our results could inform efforts to reduce unnecessary skeletal surveys.

The role of ketamine as an antidepressant agent

The role of ketamine as an antidepressant agent

Reasons for treatment changes in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a chart review study

BackgroundAdults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often cycle through multiple treatments for reasons that are not well documented. This study analyzed the reasons underlying treatment changes among adults treated for ADHD in a real-world setting.MethodsData were collected via an online reporting form completed by eligible physicians between October and November 2020. Data for adult patients in the United States who were diagnosed with ADHD and initiated a treatment regimen within 1 to 5 years of chart abstraction were obtained. Reason for a treatment change was described for a randomly selected regimen episode, which spanned from treatment initiation until the earliest among treatment add-on/switch or discontinuation, death, or date of chart abstraction. The overall rate of ADHD/treatment-related complications were also described. Physician satisfaction with current treatment options for adult ADHD and opinions on areas for improvement were assessed.ResultsData on 320 patients were reported by 152 physicians specializing in psychiatry (40.1%), pediatrics (25.0%), family medicine (21.7%), and internal medicine (13.2%). Patients had a mean age of 29.3 years; most were diagnosed with ADHD as adults (57.5%) and within the previous 5 years (56.5%). Selected treatment regimens included stimulants (79.1%), nonstimulants (14.7%), and combination therapy (5.6%) for an average duration of 1.9 years. Among patients with treatment discontinuation (N = 59), the most common reasons for discontinuation were suboptimal symptom management (55.9%), occurrence of ADHD/treatment-related complications (25.4%), and patient attitude/dislike of medication (25.4%). The main reasons for other key treatment changes were inadequate/suboptimal management of symptoms and cost considerations. Over 40% of patients had ≥ 1 documented ADHD/treatment-related complication, irrespective of whether they led to a treatment change. One in 5 physicians (19.8%) were very dissatisfied, moderately dissatisfied, or neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with current treatment options for ADHD in adults; the top 3 suggested improvements were lower risk of abuse (71.7%), longer effect duration (65.1%), and fewer ADHD/treatment-related complications (61.2%).ConclusionsThe top reasons for treatment changes among adults with ADHD are lack of efficacy and ADHD/treatment-related complications, highlighting the importance of developing more effective and safer treatments to alleviate the burden of ADHD.

Association of ‘Low Risk’ Fractures With Abuse in Young Children

Association of ‘Low Risk’ Fractures With Abuse in Young Children

Nonclinical evaluation of abuse liability of the dual orexin receptor antagonist lemborexant

Lemborexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist (DORA) approved in multiple countries including the United States, Japan, Canada and Australia for the treatment of adults with insomnia. As required for marketing approval of new compounds with central nervous system activity with sedating effects, the abuse potential of lemborexant was assessed in accordance with regulatory guidelines, which included three nonclinical studies. These assessments comprised physical dependence and drug discrimination studies in rats and a self-administration study in rhesus monkeys. There was no evidence of withdrawal signs following abrupt drug discontinuation, indicating that lemborexant does not induce physical dependence. In the drug discrimination study, lemborexant at doses up to 1000 mg/kg administered orally did not cross-generalize to the zolpidem training stimulus, although another DORA included in the same experiment, suvorexant, showed partial generalization with zolpidem. In rhesus monkeys, lemborexant treatment did not induce any gross behavioral changes, and there was no increase in self-administration rates compared with control, indicative of a lack of reinforcing effects of lemborexant. Collectively, these nonclinical studies support the position that lemborexant, which has been placed in Schedule IV by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration, has a low risk of abuse in humans.

Fractures Presumed to Be Low Risk for Abuse in Young Mobile Children: Association With Concomitant Suspicious Injuries.

To evaluate the likelihood of abuse for various fractures, we aimed to compare the prevalence of concomitant suspicious injuries (CSIs) in subjects with fractures presumed to be low risk for abuse to those with non-low-risk fractures (aim 1) and to evaluate the prevalence of low-risk and non-low-risk fractures identified on skeletal survey (SS) (aim 2). Subjects included toddlers 9 to 23 months of age presenting to a children's hospital system with a fracture and having an SS completed (aim 1) as well as those who had an SS completed for any concern for abuse (aim 2). For aim 1, we performed a 5-year retrospective case-control study. Low-risk fractures were defined as extremity buckle, clavicle, supracondylar, or toddler's fractures. Controls included moderate- and high-risk fracture groups. Groups were compared for the prevalence of CSIs. For aim 2, we described the frequencies of all fracture types identified by SS completed for any concern for abuse over the same period. For aim 1, there were 58 low-risk, 92 moderate-risk, and 8 high-risk fractures. The rates of CSIs were not significantly different between low- and moderate-risk fractures (odds ratio, 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-2.5), whereas half of high-risk fractures had CSIs. Forty-five subjects had an occult fracture on SS completed for any abuse concern. All low-risk fractures were identified by SS, most commonly buckle fractures (22.2% of cases). Fractures presumed to be low risk for abuse in young, mobile children require consideration of abuse as a cause.

Novel analgesic agents obtained by molecular hybridization of orthosteric and allosteric ligands

Despite the high incidence of acute and chronic pain in the general population, the efficacy of currently available medications is unsatisfactory. Insufficient management of pain has a profound impact on the quality of life and can have serious physical, psychological, social, and economic consequences. This unmet need reflects a failure to develop novel classes of analgesic drugs with superior clinical properties and lower risk of abuse. Nevertheless, recent advances in our understanding of the neurobiology of pain are offering new opportunities for developing different therapeutic approaches. Among those, the activation of M2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors, which play a key role in the cholinergic regulation of the nociceptive transmission, constitutes one of the most promising strategies. We have recently developed a small library of novel pharmacological agents by merging the structures of known orthosteric and allosteric muscarinic ligands through their molecular hybridization, an emerging approach in medicinal chemistry based on the combination of pharmacophoric moieties of different bioactive substances to produce a new compound with improved pharmacological properties. Herein we report the functional characterization of the new ligands in vitro and the assessment of their efficacy as analgesic agents and tolerability in mice. This work provides new insights for the development and optimization of novel muscarinic hybrid compounds for the management of pain.

Results from a long-term open-label extension study of adjunctive buprenorphine/samidorphan combination in patients with major depressive disorder

Buprenorphine/samidorphan (BUP/SAM; ALKS 5461) is an investigational opioid system modulator for the adjunctive treatment of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), who did not respond adequately to prior antidepressant therapy (ADT). FORWARD-2, an open-label extension study, assessed long-term safety and tolerability of adjunctive BUP/SAM treatment in these patients. Patients from four short-term trials and de novo patients were enrolled; all had confirmed MDD and a current major depressive episode lasting 2–24 months. Patients were treated with an established ADT for ≥8 weeks before receiving sublingual, adjunctive BUP/SAM 2 mg/2 mg for up to 52 weeks. Safety (primary objective) was assessed via adverse events (AEs), the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS). Exploratory evaluation of efficacy was done using the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Of 1485 patients, 50% completed the study and 11% discontinued due to AEs. AEs of nausea, headache, constipation, dizziness, and somnolence, each occurred in ≥10% of patients. There was no evidence of increased suicidal ideation or behavior. Euphoria-related AEs were uncommon (1.2%). Following abrupt BUP/SAM discontinuation, “drug withdrawal” AEs were infrequent (0.4%), and the incidence of COWS categorical worsening after abrupt drug discontinuation was low (6.5%). Improvements in mean MADRS scores were maintained until study end, suggesting durability of antidepressant effect in patients continuing treatment. BUP/SAM was generally well tolerated, with a low risk of abuse and an AE profile consistent with those seen in placebo-controlled studies. Withdrawal reports were uncommon and of limited clinical impact.

Tramadol with or without paracetamol (acetaminophen) for cancer pain.

Tramadol is an opioid analgesic licensed for use in moderate to severe pain. It is considered as a low risk for abuse, so control regulations are not as stringent as for 'strong' opioids such as morphine. It has a potential role as a step 2 option of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder. To assess the benefits and adverse effects of tramadol with or without paracetamol (acetaminophen) for cancer-related pain. We searched the following databases using a wide range of search terms: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched three clinical trials registry databases. The date of the last search was 2 November 2016. We selected studies that were randomised, with placebo or active controls, or both, and included a minimum of 10 participants per treatment arm. We were interested particularly in blinded studies, but also included open studies.We excluded non-randomised studies, studies of experimental pain, case reports, and clinical observations. Two review authors independently extracted data using a standard form and checked for agreement before entry into Review Manager 5. We included information about the number of participants treated and demographic details, type of cancer, drug and dosing regimen, study design (placebo or active control) and methods, study duration and follow-up, analgesic outcome measures and results, withdrawals, and adverse events. We collated multiple reports of the same study, so that each study, rather than each report, was the unit of interest in the review. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.The main outcomes of interest for benefit were pain reduction of 30% or greater and 50% or greater from baseline, participants with pain no worse than mild, and participants feeling much improved or very much improved. We included 10 studies (12 reports) with 958 adult participants. All the studies enrolled participants with chronic malignant tumour-related pain who were experiencing pain intensities described as moderate to severe, with most experiencing at least 4/10 with current treatment. The mean ages were 59 to 70 years, with participants aged between 24 and 87 years. Study length ranged from one day to six months. Five studies used a cross-over design. Tramadol doses ranged from 50 mg as single dose to 600 mg per day; doses of 300 mg per day to 400 mg per day were most common.Nine studies were at high risk of bias for one to four criteria (only one high risk of bias for size). We judged all the results to be very low quality evidence because of widespread lack of blinding of outcome assessment, inadequately described sequence generation, allocation concealment, and small numbers of participants and events. Important outcomes were poorly reported. There were eight different active comparators and one comparison with placebo. There was little information available for any comparison and no firm conclusions could be drawn for any outcome.Single comparisons of oral tramadol with codeine plus paracetamol, of dihydrocodeine, and of rectal versus oral tramadol provided no data for key outcomes. One study used tramadol combined with paracetamol; four participants received this intervention. One study compared tramadol with flupirtine - a drug that is no longer available. One study compared tramadol with placebo and a combination of cobrotoxin, tramadol, and ibuprofen, but the dosing schedule poorly explained.Two studies (191 participants) compared tramadol with buprenorphine. One study (131 participants) reported a similar proportion of no or mild pain at 14 days.Three studies (300 participants) compared tramadol with morphine. Only one study, combining tramadol, tramadol plus paracetamol, and paracetamol plus codeine as a single weak-opioid group reported results. Weak opioid produced reduction in pain of at least 30% from baseline in 55/117 (47%) participants, compared with 91/110 (82%) participants with morphine. Weak opioid produced reduction in pain of at least 50% in 49/117 (42%) participants, compared with 83/110 (75%) participants with morphine.There was no useful information for any other outcome of benefit or harm. There is limited, very low quality, evidence from randomised controlled trials that tramadol produced pain relief in some adults with pain due to cancer and no evidence at all for children. There is very low quality evidence that it is not as effective as morphine. This review does not provide a reliable indication of the likely effect. The likelihood that the effect will be substantially different is very high. The place of tramadol in managing cancer pain and its role as step 2 of the WHO analgesic ladder is unclear.

Phenazepam: to the question of the efficacy and safety of benzodiazepine derivatives

The widespread use of benzodiazepines in general medicalpractice in patients with complaints of anxiety and insomnia is due to a combination of efficacy and relative safety. Benzodiazepines have several advantages over other groups of sedatives: a wider range of doses between anxiolytic and sedative effect, a higher ratio between the average lethal and average effective doses, the lower risk of abuse. However, with prolonged use of even therapeutic doses of benzodiazepines (more than 6 months), the risk of dependence may increase - more often with the use of high-potency short-acting drugs. Nevertheless, this risk with the correct use of drugs is greatly exaggerated. In many patients, prolonged therapy with benzodiazepines causes an improvement in the condition without the development of serious side effects. Do not abandon the use of this group of substances, following prejudices, but the appointment of benzodiazepines requires a thorough diagnostic assessment of the patient's condition and rational use of drugs.

Growth recovery lines are more common in infants at high vs. low risk for abuse.

Growth recovery lines, also known as growth arrest lines, are transverse radiodense metaphyseal bands that develop due to a temporary arrest of endochondral ossification caused by local or systemic insults. To determine if growth recovery lines are more common in infants at high risk versus low risk for abuse. Reports of American College of Radiology compliant skeletal surveys (1999-2013) were reviewed with clinical records. Infants at low risk for abuse had a skull fracture without significant intracranial injury, history of a fall and clinical determination of low risk (child protection team/social work assessment). Infants at high risk had significant intracranial injury, retinal hemorrhages, other skeletal injuries and clinical determination of high risk. There were 52 low-risk infants (mean: 4.7months, range: 0.4-12months) and 21 high-risk infants (mean: 4.2months, range: 0.8-9.1months). Two blinded radiologists independently evaluated the skeletal survey radiographs of the knees/lower legs for the presence of at least one growth recovery line. When growth recovery lines are scored as probably present or definitely present, their prevalence in the low-risk group was 38% (standard deviation [SD] = 8%; reader 1 = 17/52, reader 2 = 23/52) vs. 71% (SD = 7%; reader 1 = 16/21, reader 2 = 14/21) in the high-risk group (P < 0.001; odds ratio 4.0, 95% CI: 1.7-9.5). Growth recovery lines are encountered at a significantly higher rate in infants at high risk vs. low risk for abuse. This suggests that abused infants are prone to a temporary disturbance in endochondral ossification as a result of episodic physiological stresses.

Transdermal fentanyl patches versus patient-controlled intravenous morphine analgesia for postoperative pain management.

Background:Acute and severe pain is common in patients postoperatively and should be correctly managed. In the past years studies on preparing better postoperative pain control have resulted in development of postoperative pain management guidelines. Perhaps, one of the major improvements in managing postoperative pain is the development of the patient-controlled analgesia systems (PCA), especially through intra venous (IV), extradural and transdermal routes, which has resulted in marked improvements in acute postoperative pain management. Physicians administrate potent opioids for moderate to severe post-surgical pains. Morphine is the most commonly IV-PCA administrated analgesic. The fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system (fentanyl ITS) is also another efficient option for pain management.Objectives:The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic effects of these two routine postoperative pain control systems.Patients and Methods:We enrolled 281 patients (224 males, 57 females) in this blind randomized controlled clinical trial, who had undergone an orthopedic surgery, with the mean age of 33.91 ± 14.45 years. Patients were randomly divided into two groups; in group A patients received IV-morphine PCA pump and in group B fentanyl transdermal patches were attached on patients’ arms. The severity of the pain was registered according to Visual Analogue Scale in specially designed forms by pain-trained nurses in two steps; first after the surgery and next before the beginning of analgesic effects. After 24 hours, the pain score was assessed again.Results:No significant difference was observed in mean pain intensity score at the first patient assessment. Mean pain intensity scores were also similar in both groups at the last measured time point (P > 0.05). Differential pain intensity scores, showing the impacts of analgesic system on the pain experience of the patients was also similar between fentanyl patches (6.48 ± 2.20) and morphine PCIA (6.40 ± 1.80). (P > 0.05) Mean patient satisfactory score (scale: 0–100) was also similar in both groups (P > 0.05). The percentage of patients, whose differential pain intensity scores at 24 hours reached our pain management goal was similar between fentanyl and morphine groups (P > 0.05). The percentage of patients with at least one adverse event was significantly higher in fentanyl group (P < 0.05). The most frequent adverse events were nausea, vomiting and itching. In none of the groups, no patient experienced serious adverse events related to the studied medications.Conclusions:Although both pain killing therapeutic regimens are safe and effective for postoperative pain management, regarding the easy usage of the patches, lower risk of abuse and cost-effectiveness in the Iranian market, it is recommended for use in Iranian hospitals and trauma centers and in countries with similar socioeconomic situations.

Diphenhydramine dependence through deep intramuscular injection resulting in myonecrosis and prolonged QT interval

Diphenhydramine (DPH) is a first-generation antihistamine, which is useful in treating allergic reaction, and is usually considered innocuous. We describe a retired nurse with history of depression, who began to develop drug-seeking behaviour after her first receiving of an intramuscular (IM) DPH injection due to urticaria. The 49-year-old patient had developed IM DPH dependence within 4 months. She needed to receive psychiatric inpatient treatment because of depressive mood, serious myonecrosis over injected sites, and prolongation of QT interval. This is the first reported case of DPH dependence through the IM route. Second-generation antihistamines might be better choices for patients with psychiatric illness by reason of their lower effects on central nervous system and lower risk of abuse.

Pharmacological and clinical dilemmas of prescribing in co‐morbid adult attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder and addiction

The present article reviews whether available efficacy and safety data support the pharmacological treatment of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in patients with concurrent substance use disorders (SUD). Arguments for and against treating adult ADHD with active SUD are discussed. Findings from 19 large open studies and controlled clinical trials show that the use of atomoxetine or extended-release methylphenidate formulations, together with psychological therapy, yield promising though inconclusive results about short term efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of adult ADHD in patients with SUD and no other severe mental disorders. However, the efficacy of these drugs is scant or lacking for treating concurrent SUD. No serious safety issues have been associated with these drugs in patients with co-morbid SUD-ADHD, given their low risk of abuse and favourable side effect and drug-drug interaction profile. The decision to treat adult ADHD in the context of active SUD depends on various factors, some directly related to SUD-ADHD co-morbidity (e.g. degree of diagnostic uncertainty for ADHD) and other factors related to the clinical expertise of the medical staff and availability of adequate resources (e.g. the means to monitor compliance with pharmacological treatment). Our recommendation is that clinical decisions be individualized and based on a careful analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of pharmacological treatment for ADHD on a case-by-case basis in the context of active SUD.

The Dilemma of Opioid-Induced Hyperalgesia and Tolerance in Chronic Opioid Therapy = معضلة فرط التألم و حالة التحمل الناتج عن العلاج طويل الأمد بالأدوية ( المسكنات ) الأفيونية

The Dilemma of Opioid-Induced Hyperalgesia and Tolerance in Chronic Opioid Therapy = معضلة فرط التألم و حالة التحمل الناتج عن العلاج طويل الأمد بالأدوية ( المسكنات ) الأفيونية

The effect of treating generalized anxiety disorder on psychoactive substance abuse and dependency in Erbil city

Background and objective: Generalized anxiety disorder is a common psychiatric disorder; it may act as a risk factor for psychoactive substance abuse and dependency development. The objectives are to assess the degree of abuse and dependency in generalized anxiety disorder patients, and the effect of treating the disorder on substances abuse and dependency. Methods: 120 patients with generalized anxiety disorder, diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), were studied from January 2007 to June 2008 for the presence of psychoactive substance abuse and dependency according to DSM-IV. All cases were managed for six months by the tricyclic antidepressant imipramine (35-75mg/day), with counseling to decrease anxiety by reassurance and anxiety management including relaxation training, in addition to supporting and encouraging the patients with abuse to stop the used psychoactive substances by a tapering schedule over weeks. Results: Substance abuse were presents in 32.5% of patients (tobacco 17.5%, benzodiazepines 13.3%, and alcohol 1.7%), this rate decreased to 13.3% (tobacco 11.7%, benzodiazepines 0.8%, and alcohol 0.8%) six months after starting treatment. The decrease in benzodiazepines abuse and dependency was greater than that in tobacco or alcohol. Conclusion: Generalized anxiety disorder appears to encourage abuse on psychoactive substances. Treating the disorder decreases abuse and using imipramine appears to have a good therapeutic effect on generalized anxiety disorder with low risk for abuse.

Internet Resources on Managing Chronic Nonmalignant Pain With Opioids: The Risks of Addiction

ABSTRACTChronic nonmalignant pain affects approximately 20% of the population. Internet resources for management of chronic pain have expanded in response to this growing population of chronic nonmalignant pain patients. As providers, it is necessary that we also are aware of what resources are available, particularly for patients with opioid use and possible addiction. Physicians need to be aware of the factors associated with opioids and take steps to mitigate the risk of abuse by individual patients. Discontinuation of opioid therapy needs to be adequately and appropriately addressed in patients with aberrant behavior and treated. This includes proper screening and monitoring and the use of emerging agents that will effectively control pain and are associated with a lower risk of abuse.

Dexmethylphenidate Extended Release

Dexmethylphenidate extended release (XR) [Focalin XR] is a CNS stimulant indicated for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in patients aged > or = 6 years. Dexmethylphenidate contains the d-threo-enantiomer of methylphenidate. Dexmethylphenidate XR capsules have a bimodal release profile, which mimics two doses of dexmethylphenidate immediate release (IR) given 4 hours apart, and allows once-daily administration. Once-daily dexmethylphenidate XR was effective and generally well tolerated in the treatment of ADHD in children, adolescents and adults in placebo-controlled trials. Improvements in ADHD symptoms were significantly greater for dexmethylphenidate XR versus placebo throughout the day, from as early as 0.5 hours after drug administration up to 11-12 hours after administration. Furthermore, dexmethylphenidate XR showed greater efficacy than osmotic release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate over the first half of the laboratory classroom day in crossover trials; however, assessments late in the day (10-12 hours post-dose) favoured OROS methylphenidate. The once-daily administration regimen with dexmethylphenidate XR avoids the need for a midday dose to be administered at school; administration options are extended in that the contents of the dexmethylphenidate XR capsule can be sprinkled on apple sauce for patients unable to swallow the capsule whole. Although dexmethylphenidate XR is a controlled substance in the US, this formulation appears to have a low risk of abuse or misuse. Thus, dexmethylphenidate XR extends the range of first-line pharmacological treatment options for children, adolescents or adults with ADHD, particularly for patients who require a rapid onset and prolonged duration of action, including children who require a reduction in ADHD symptoms throughout the school day.

Fármacos para el trastorno por déficit de atención/hiperactividad

Quantitative studies have highlighted differences in several drugs approved for use in Spain in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. No clear differences are observed, however, in the case of qualitative studies. The number of patients needed to be treated in order for one to reach complete remission (NNT) of methylphenidate (MTF) is from 2.2 to 5, and the effect size (ES) is 0.9. Atomoxetine has an NNT of 4 and an ES of 0.7. The advantages of immediate-release MTF (IR-MTF) over the extended-release version (ER-MTF) lie in its low cost, its flexibility and the better results obtained in quantitative studies. In contrast, ER-MTF offers a lower risk of abuse, needs to be taken fewer times with less need for third parties to control administration, and there is a lower risk of stigmatisation. Combination or changes of IR-MTF and ER-MTF and the combination of MTF with atomoxetine are sometimes necessary to adjust the weekday or weekend doses. Starting treatment with IR-MTF and then maintaining or changing to ER-MTF offers certain advantages as regards safety, dose adjustments and dosage. Atomoxetine is the best alternative if there is a background of adverse events with low or moderate doses of stimulants, or lack of response to high doses of stimulants. In cases of notable comorbid anxiety, both MTF and atomoxetine have the same level of indication. If there is a risk of substance abuse, both atomoxetine and ER-MTF are the preferred treatment. For the other indications, MTF is the preferred treatment.

Risk factors of elder abuse in a community dwelling Spanish sample

We analyzed the discriminative capacity of several risk factors for elder abuse and neglect, in order to identify what characteristics distinguish between caregivers with a high or low risk of abuse and neglect. Forty-five caregivers of relatives with dementia participated. The combination of caregiving impact, frequency of aggressive behaviors by care-recipients, stress related to provocative and aggressive behaviors, the frequency of provocative behaviors, interpersonal burden, autoefficiency expectations, quantity of help received and depression classify correctly as risk factors in 90.9% of the cases. This study permits us to identify what characteristics distinguish between caregivers with a high or low risk of abuse and neglect and caregivers.