Return to Research Menu
Return to Front Page
Attention Deficit Disorder
60. Smith, Ray B., McCusker, Charles F., Jones, Ruth G., and Goates, Delbert T. The use of cranial electrotherapy stimulation in the treatment of stress related attention deficit disorder, with an eighteen month follow up. Unpublished, 1991 and follow-up in 1993.
Devices: Alpha-Stim CS, CES Labs, Liss Stimulator (randomly assigned)
This study compared the effects of 3 randomly assigned CES devices which had marked differences in electrical stimulation parameters, in the treatment of stress related attention deficit disorder in 23 children and adults, 9 males, 14 females, 9 - 56 years old (average 30.96) with an average education level of 10.56 years. All had been diagnosed as having generalized anxiety disorder (61%), and/or depression (45%), and/or dysthymia (17%). 8 had a primary diagnosis of ADD. CES treatments were given daily, 45 minutes per day for 3 weeks. All 3 CES devices were equally effective based on Duncan's Range test in significantly (P<.001) reducing depression as measured on the IPAT depression scale (mean of 19.38 8.44 pretest to 13.19 7.00 post test), state and trait anxiety scales of the STAI (mean state anxiety was reduced from 39.95 11.78 pretest to 29.76 6.99 post test, and the mean trait anxiety was reduced from 43.90 11.31 pretest to 32.19 7.50 post test), and in increasing the Verbal pretest (mean of 99.38 13.20 to post test of 107.50 14.13), Performance (mean of 107.4 15.05 to 126.6 14.2 ), and Full Scale I.Q. scores on the WISC-R or WAIS-R IQ tests (mean of 103.2 13.7 to 117.6 14.28). The authors concluded that in the unlikely event that our findings are the results of placebo effect alone, a CES device, retailing at approximately $795, would still be a relatively inexpensive and apparently reliable treatment for such a debilitating disorder as stress related ADD. On 18 month follow up, the pts performed as well or better than in the original study, the Full Scale IQ had not moved significantly from where it was after the first 3 weeks of treatment, the Performance IQ fell back slightly, while the Verbal IQ continued to increase. There did not seem to be any pattern of addiction to or over dependence on the CES device. There was no side effects except for 1 pt who cried during treatments, and 1 who was sore behind the ears when the electrode gel began drying out.
77. Wilson, L.F. and Childs, A. Cranial electrotherapy stimulation for attentiontotask deficit: A case study. American Journal of Electromedicine. 5(6):9399, 1988.
Device: RelaxPak, 100 Hz, 2 mS, 1 mA, sine wave, bilateral electrodes
4 pts with measurable attentiontotask deficit were studied. 2 had severe pain problems (27 year old female and 30 year old male) but no brain injury, while 2 had suffered from post brain trauma (29 year old male, 25 year old female). One of the pain pts served as placebo control (the 30 year old male) for the other 3, each of whom served as his or her own control. CES was given for 50 minutes per day, 5 days a week for 3 weeks. Pts were pre- and post-tested on standardized cognitive measures (Trail Making Test, Digit Symbol Test, Porteus Mazes, Consonant Trigrams Test, Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test, Paced Serial Arithmetic Test) before and following CES, and again 3 weeks later. Pts were also tested on the Profile of Mood States Inventory. The results among the CES treated pts showed striking and significant improvement in the post treatment scores and in the associated extent of the neurological deficit. It was concluded that CES is an effective nondrug alternative in a cognitive rehabilitation model for treating attentiontotask deficit. No side effects were reported.
Return to Research Menu
Return to Front Page