Prescription Stimulants: From Cognitive Enhancement to Misuse

From Consensus Statement to Pills to Pixels: New Innovations in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Care

Objectives: This review aims to present recent innovations and advancements in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) care, encompassing international consensus statement, new medication formulations, digital therapeutics, and neurostimulation devices. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of relevant articles published in the past five years was conducted, emphasizing the evidence base, efficacy, safety, and practical implications of these advancements. Results: The World Federation of ADHD Consensus Statement offers an updated diagnostic and treatment framework rooted in global scientific evidence. There are several newer ADHD medication formulations, including a nonstimulant (Viloxazine extended release) and the first transdermal amphetamine patch approved to treat ADHD. These options offer some unique benefits to personalize treatment based on symptom profile, lifestyle, preferences, and response. Digital tools offer additional means to restructure environments for individuals with ADHD, reducing impairment and reliance on others. In addition, digital therapeutics enhance access, affordability, personalization, and feasibility of ADHD care, complementing or augmenting existing interventions. Trigeminal nerve stimulation emerges as a well-tolerated nonpharmacological, device-based treatment for pediatric ADHD, with initial trials indicating effect sizes comparable to nonstimulant medications. Conclusions: These innovations in ADHD care represent clinically significant new treatment options and opportunities for personalized care. Health care professionals should integrate these developments into clinical practice, mindful of individual patient and family needs and preferences. Future research should assess long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability of these innovations.

Cognitive Enhancement and Social Mobility: Skepticism from India

Cognitive enhancement (CE) covers a broad spectrum of methods, including behavioral techniques, nootropic drugs, and neuromodulation interventions. However, research on their use in children has almost exclusively been carried out in high-income countries with limited understanding of how experts working with children view their use in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). This study examines perceptions on cognitive enhancement, their techniques, neuroethical issues about their use from an LMICs perspective.Seven Indian experts were purposively sampled for their expertise in bioethics, child development and child education. In-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured topic guide to examine (1) understanding of CE, (2) which approaches were viewed as cognitive enhancers, (3) attitudes toward different CE techniques and (4) neuroethical issues related to CE use within the Indian context. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed before thematic analysis.Findings indicate Indian experts view cognitive enhancement as a holistic positive impact on overall functioning and well-being, rather than improvement in specific cognitive abilities. Exogenous agents, and neuromodulation were viewed with skepticism, whereas behavioral approaches were viewed more favorably. Neuroethical concerns included equitable access to CE, limited scientific evidence and over-reliance on technology to address societal problems. This highlights the need for more contextually relevant neuroethics research in LMICs.

Prescription Stimulant Misuse Among Nursing Students: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Nonmedical prescription stimulants are used to reduce symptoms of inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity in children and adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity/disorder. They are Schedule II controlled substances because of their high potential for dependence, and individuals who misuse them without a valid prescription are subject to criminal charges. Stimulant medications are also associated with common side effects (e.g., insomnia) as well as more serious but less common side effects (e.g., arrhythmias). Despite the potential health and legal consequences, misuse of prescription stimulants has become a public health crisis on college campuses in the United States. Neurocognitive enhancement is the primary reason that college students report misusing prescription stimulants, despite no enhancement of cognitive functioning when taken by healthy adults. Nursing students may be at risk for misuse because of their high levels of academic and clinical demands and because many start misusing in nursing school. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the databases PubMed, Science Direct, EBSCOhost, and Academic OneFile were systematically searched to investigate the (a) percentage of prescription stimulant misuse studies that have included nursing students, (b) prevalence of prescription stimulant misuse among nursing students, (c) motivations for prescription stimulant misuse among nursing students, and (d) demographic factors associated with increased use among nursing students. Results revealed that of the 197 studies conducted within the past decade (2010-2021), only 1.02% (two) included nursing students. Future studies must investigate the prevalence and nature of prescription stimulant misuse among nursing students.

Type of medication therapy for ADHD and stimulant misuse during adolescence: a cross-sectional multi-cohort national study

Background

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with higher substance use rates. Stimulant and non-stimulant pharmacotherapy improve adolescent ADHD, but their associations with prescription stimulant misuse (PSM), cocaine, and methamphetamine use are unclear. Using 2005-2020 US Monitoring the Future data, we investigated relationships between ADHD pharmacotherapy history and PSM, cocaine, or methamphetamine use.

Methods

Secondary students (13-19 years) provided data on pharmacotherapy history (N = 199,560; 86.3% of total sample) between January 1, 2005 and May 31, 2020 in a cross-sectional multi-cohort study; weights assured a nationally representative sample. Participants were grouped by ADHD pharmacotherapy history: none (88.7%; principally non-ADHD controls); stimulant-only (5.8%); non-stimulant-only (3.3%); both stimulant and non-stimulant (2.1%). Outcomes were past-year PSM, cocaine, and methamphetamine use. Logistic regressions examined relationships between pharmacotherapy history and outcomes, controlling for sociodemographics, recent substance use, and stimulant treatment cessation.

Findings

Past-year outcome rates were lowest in adolescents with no pharmacotherapy history: 4.7% for PSM [8310/174,561], 1.6% for cocaine [2858/174,688], and 0.7% for methamphetamine [1036/148,378]. A history of both stimulant and non-stimulant treatment was associated with the highest rates: 22.3% for PSM [940/4098], 10.4% for cocaine [450/4110], and 7.8% for methamphetamine [275/3427]. Adolescents who received monotherapy (stimulant- or non-stimulant-only) had intermediate rates, with no differences between monotherapy groups.

Interpretation

While elevated PSM and illicit stimulant use rates are likely influenced by ADHD, our findings suggested adolescents with a history of both stimulant and non-stimulant pharmacotherapy are at highest risk for these stimulant outcomes. Adolescents receiving ADHD pharmacotherapy should be monitored for PSM and illicit stimulant use.

Funding

National Institute on Drug Abuse/National Institutes of Health (USA) and Food and Drug Administration (USA).

Prescription Stimulants in College and Medical Students: A Narrative Review of Misuse, Cognitive Impact, and Adverse Effects

Stimulants are effective in treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Psychiatrist Charles Bradley first made this discovery in 1937 when he found that children treated with amphetamines showed improvements in school performance and behavior. Between 1995 and 2008, stimulants to treat ADHD increased six-fold among American adults and adolescents at an annual rate of 6.5%. Stimulants without a prescription, known as nonmedical use or misuse, have also increased. The highest rates of nonmedical prescription drug misuse in the United States are seen most notably in young adults between 18 and 25 years, based on data from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in 2021. Aside from undergraduate students, nonmedical prescription stimulant use is prevalent among medical students worldwide. A recent literature review reported the utilization of stimulants without a prescription in 970 out of 11,029 medical students. The percentages of medical students across the country misusing stimulants varied from 5.2% to 47.4%. Academic enhancement, reported in 50% to 89% of college students with stimulant misuse, is the most common reason for nonmedical stimulant use. With the increasing use of stimulants among adolescents and adults, it is unclear what long-term outcomes will be since little data are available that describe differences in how side effects are experienced for prescribed and non-prescribed users. The present narrative review focuses on these adverse effects in this population and the reasonings behind misuse and nonmedical use.

Outcomes and Predictors of Stimulant Misuse in College Students with and Without ADHD

In recent years, rates of prescription stimulant misuse have increased among young adults ages 18 to 25 along with increases in dispensing rates of these medications. Preliminary studies suggest that college students with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) may be more likely to misuse their stimulant medication than their non-ADHD peers. Research is needed to further explore possible rates, correlates, and outcomes of prescription stimulant misuse among college students with and without ADHD. Data regarding study strategies, psychological functioning, stimulant misuse, and GPA were collected from students from universities within the US (N = 144), showing significantly higher rates of misuse among college students with ADHD. With depression and anxiety entered into the predictive model, inattentive symptoms were the only significant predictor of misuse in the full sample. The present findings have implications for academic interventions aimed at supporting the success of college students with and without ADHD and inform academic outcomes of prescription stimulant misuse.

Differences in Prescription Stimulant Misuse Motives Across Adolescents and Young Adults in the United States

OBJECTIVE

While prescription stimulant misuse (PSM) is common in adolescents and young adults (AYAs), PSM motives are poorly understood. This study examined a number of PSM motives across the AYA age spectrum using the 2015-2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.

METHODS

In all, 86,918 AYAs (aged 14-25 years) were included. Individual PSM motives (eg, to study) and motive categories (ie, cognitive enhancement only, recreational only, weight loss only, and combined motives) were examined by age. Logistic regression models examined links between individual motives or motive categories and educational status, substance use, DSM-IV substance use disorders (SUD), and mental health correlates.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found across AYAs in cognitive enhancement only (14 years = 40.4%; 24 and 25 years = 71.2%; P < .0001) and recreational only (14 years = 25.8%; 24 and 25 years = 9.8%; P < .0001) or combined PSM motives, (14 years = 32.3%; 24 and 25 years = 18.0%; P = .008); college students and graduates had particularly high rates of cognitive enhancement only (college = 78.2%; graduates = 74.7%; non-college = 63.5%). Recreational-only and combined motives were significantly elevated in AYAs with any past-year SUD, especially to get high (78%-136% higher in those with SUD; P ≤ .001). While any PSM was associated with higher odds of SUD and mental health outcomes, including suicidal ideation, odds were highest for recreational or combined motives.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive enhancement with PSM occurs more often in young adults compared to adolescents, college students endorse more cognitive enhancement than those not in school, and the presence of any PSM in AYAs is linked to more substance use, suicidal ideation, and other psychopathology. PSM prevention in adolescents as well as screening and intervention among AYA is highly recommended.

Psychosocial functioning among college students who misuse stimulants versus other drugs

The misuse of prescription stimulants (e.g., Ritalin, Adderall) is a large and growing problem on college campuses. Emerging research examines not only the demographic predictors of stimulant misuse but also the potentially role that stimulant misuse plays in a college student's overall functioning and mental health. To better understand the experiences specifically linked with stimulant misuse rather than substance use more broadly, we tested whether psychosocial functioning differed across four groups of college students: those who do not misuse stimulants or other hard drugs; those who misuse both stimulants and other hard drugs; those who misuse stimulants but not other hard drugs; and those who misuse other hard drugs but not stimulants (N = 1534; 40.3% male; 33.9% ethnic minority). Those who misused stimulants reported higher levels of impulsivity, as well as substance use consequences, than those who did not use any hard drugs. However, these differences were exacerbated among those who misused stimulants and other hard drugs. Taken together, these findings suggest that stimulant misuse typically occurs in a broader pattern of substance use, and that stimulant misusers generally fall along a continuum of substance use severity in terms of psychosocial functioning.

Disentangling the Social Context of Nonmedical Use of Prescription Stimulants in College Students

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the social context of nonmedical use of prescription stimulants (NMUPS) among college students who endorsed NMUPS with co-occurring substance use disorders (SUD) compared with those without co-occurring SUDs.

METHODS

Presented here are new analyses based on data previously collected from college students aged 18 to 28 years derived from the Boston metropolitan area who endorsed NMUPS (N = 100) at least once in their lifetime. Differences between those with lifetime history of SUD (N = 46) and without a history of SUD (N = 54) on the Massachusetts General Hospital ADHD Medication Misuse and Diversion Assessment were analyzed using the Student t test, the Pearson χ² test, and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

RESULTS

College students who endorsed NMUPS with co-occurring SUD were more likely than those without SUD to have bought or traded stimulants, bought or traded in their car, used at parties with drugs/alcohol, or used intranasally (all P < .05). Intranasal administration was common (38% of all students endorsing NMUPS) and was associated with misuse at a party and simultaneous use with cocaine (P = .04), marijuana (P < .001), and alcohol (P < .001), compared with only oral use.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Notable characteristics were identified among individuals who engaged in NMUPS in the type, amount, cost, and ascertainment of stimulants.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

The concurrence of SUD and/or intranasal administration appear to represent a more severe phenotype of NMUPS that should be considered in the implementation of future prevention and intervention protocols on college campuses. (Am J Addict 2020;29:476-484).

Editorial: Stimulants: Friend or Foe?

Stimulants remain the treatment of choice for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), in part owing to their large effect size within the pharmacotherapeutic repertoire for ADHD-in other words, they are highly effective. When used appropriately, they are also quite safe and actually mitigate the misuse of drugs or alcohol. So, why all the fuss?

Characterizing Pathways of Non-oral Prescription Stimulant Non-medical Use Among Adults Recruited From Reddit

Objective: Prescription stimulant non-medical use (NMU) is a national predicament. While the risks of prescription stimulant NMU have been considered, less is known about non-oral use. To focus on this gap, a sample of adults with non-oral prescription stimulant NMU within the last 5-years was recruited. The purpose of the present study was to characterize the pathways and substance transitions associated with prescription stimulant NMU and non-oral prescription stimulant NMU in this unique sample of adults. Methods: Adults (n = 225) reporting non-oral prescription stimulant NMU within the last 5 years were recruited to complete an online survey by banner ads placed on the Reddit website between February and September 2019. After completion of the survey, a second study consisting of an in-depth telephone interview was conducted with 23 participants: interviews took place between July and September 2019. Data reported here include substance, route of administration and class transitions, as well as qualitative data from the interviews. Results: Approximately 1 in 5 began their substance use trajectory with prescription stimulants (19.1%). Other than marijuana, most exposures to illicit substances occurred after both initial prescription stimulant NMU and initial non-oral prescription stimulant NMU. The most frequently reported route of administration transition was from oral use to snorting (n = 158, 70.2%), however, other route of administration transitions included oral use to injection drug use (n = 14, 6%). In-depth interviews elaborated upon these transitions and indicated that prescription stimulant NMU was consequential to substance use pathways. Conclusions: Oral prescription stimulant NMU was a precursor to non-oral prescription stimulant NMU. Non-oral prescription stimulant NMU was a precursor to illicit substance use, suggesting that prescription stimulant NMU impacts substance use pathways and revealing opportunities for intervention.