Results The technology assessment was unable to differentiate between the various drugs in terms of efficacy , and its economic model was ultimately driven by cost differences .
While the assessment concluded that the economic model " clearly identified an optimal treatment strategy " with first-line dexamphetamine , the NICE appraisal committee subsequently found it impossible to distinguish between the different strategies on grounds of cost-effectiveness .
Background Health technology assessment s ( HTAs ) by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence ( NICE ) enjoy high levels of international attention .
The present analysis addresses NICE 's appraisal of methylpheni date , atomoxetine and dexamphetamine for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) in children and adolescents , published in March 2006 .
National Institute of Mental Health Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD follow-up: 24-month outcomes of treatment strategies for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
OBJECTIVE In the Multimodal Treatment Study of ADHD ( MTA ) , the effects of medication management ( MedMgt ) and behavior modification therapy ( Beh ) and their combination ( Comb ) and usual community comparison ( CC ) in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) differed at the 14-month assessment as a result of superiority of the MTA MedMgt strategy ( Comb or MedMgt ) over Beh and CC and modest additional benefits of Comb over MedMgt alone . Here we evaluate the persistence of these beneficial effects 10 months beyond the 14 months of intensive intervention . METHODS Of 579 children who entered the study , 540 ( 93 % ) participated in the first follow-up 10 months after the end of treatment . Mixed-effects regression models explored possible persisting effects of the MTA medication strategy , the incremental benefits of Comb over MedMgt alone , and the possible superiority of Beh over CC on 5 effectiveness and 4 service use domains . RESULTS The MTA medication strategy showed persisting significant superiority over Beh and CC for ADHD and oppositional-defiant symptoms at 24 months , although not as great as at 14 months . Significant additional benefits of Comb over MedMgt and of Beh over CC were not found . The groups differed significantly in mean dose ( methylpheni date equivalents 30.4 , 37.5 , 25.7 , and 24.0 mg/day , respectively ) . Continuing medication use partly mediated the persisting superiority of Comb and MedMgt . CONCLUSION The benefits of intensive MedMgt for ADHD extend 10 months beyond the intensive treatment phase only in symptom domains and diminish over time
Results The technology assessment was unable to differentiate between the various drugs in terms of efficacy , and its economic model was ultimately driven by cost differences .
While the assessment concluded that the economic model " clearly identified an optimal treatment strategy " with first-line dexamphetamine , the NICE appraisal committee subsequently found it impossible to distinguish between the different strategies on grounds of cost-effectiveness .
Background Health technology assessment s ( HTAs ) by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence ( NICE ) enjoy high levels of international attention .
The present analysis addresses NICE 's appraisal of methylpheni date , atomoxetine and dexamphetamine for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) in children and adolescents , published in March 2006 .