Methylphenidate in early poststroke recovery: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Safety of Stimulants Across Patient Populations: A Meta-Analysis

Importance

The use of stimulant medications has expanded substantially beyond the traditional treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to encompass a variety of other clinical conditions. Understanding the safety of these medications is important as their use increases across diverse patient populations.

Objective

To assess the safety of stimulant medications as reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine, and other amphetamines.

Data Sources

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from July 1, 2024, through February 28, 2025, using CINAHL, Embase, PubMed or MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science for studies published since 2000. Keywords included safety, adverse event, side effect, amphetamine, dextroamphetamine, stimulant, lisdexamfetamine, and methylphenidate.

Study Selection

RCTs published between January 1, 2000, and December 13, 2024, were included. These trials investigated the safety of stimulants in various clinical conditions, including ADHD, depression, binge eating disorder, schizophrenia, Alzheimer disease, and stimulant use disorders as well as in healthy individuals. Trials not focused on safety or adverse events (AEs) of stimulants, nonoriginal research, nonhuman research, trials with concomitant prescriptions other than stimulants, and trials without a placebo group were excluded.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data extraction followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Independent reviewers extracted study data, and a random-effects model was used to pool results. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the risk ratio (RR) of developing any AE in participants taking stimulants vs placebo.

Results

A total of 93 RCTs were included after exclusions. The methodological quality assessment of the included trials showed overall low or unclear risk of bias. Trials with a duration of up to 52 weeks showed that stimulant medications were associated with an increased risk of overall AEs compared with placebo (RR, 1.34; 90% CI, 1.27-1.41), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 67%). Statistical significance of this finding was maintained when subgroups (ie, methylphenidate, lisdexamfetamine, and other amphetamines) were separately analyzed.

Conclusions and Relevance

This meta-analysis found an increased risk of overall AEs associated with stimulants compared with placebo. Future research could provide more standardized and consistent assessments of this outcome and may improve understanding about misuse risk.

Neurostimulant Use for Rehabilitation and Recovery After Stroke: A Narrative Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Stroke often results in significant impairments across various domains, including movement, language, cognition, and mood. Neurostimulants have been proposed as potential therapeutic interventions to enhance recovery in these areas.

METHODS

This narrative literature review examines clinical trials investigating the efficacy of neurostimulants in poststroke recovery. It evaluates outcomes related to aphasia, motor deficits, cognition, fatigue, and depression.

RESULTS

The qualitative analysis included 34 trials testing the following neurostimulants: methylphenidate (n=6), amphetamines (n=8), memantine (n=2), modafinil (n=2), levodopa (n=14), amantadine (n=1), bromocriptine (n=3), and ropinirole (n=1). Of the 34 studies, 31 were randomized, placebo-controlled (double-blind, n=27; single-blind, n=2; unblinded n=2), 2 were randomized and not placebo-controlled, and 1 was not randomized. Study design was either multiarm (n=23), crossover (n=10), or used subjects as their own control (n=1). Mean sample size was 49.4 (5-593).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that memantine may be effective for aphasia, although few phase III trials exist, whereas bromocriptine and amphetamines lack sufficient evidence for long-term recovery of aphasia. Levodopa may improve motor aphasias but has not shown long-term benefits for motor recovery. Similarly, ropinirole has not been shown to improve poststroke motor outcomes. Methylphenidate has limited efficacy for cognitive improvement but may enhance poststroke functionality and mood. Modafinil may help with poststroke fatigue. In conclusion, there are promising results of positive effects of neurostimulants with few side effects, though studies are limited by heterogeneous designs and small sample sizes. Neurostimulant efficacy must be assessed in conjunction with specific rehabilitation modalities as part of larger, well-designed studies to best understand their effects on impairment.

Effect of amphetamines on blood pressure

BACKGROUND

Daily ingestion of amphetamines is common, as they are widely prescribed for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and other diagnoses. People also use amphetamines recreationally or in an attempt to boost cognitive or athletic performance. Amphetamines have the potential to increase blood pressure, and we do not know if the long-term benefits of daily amphetamine use outweigh the potential harms.

OBJECTIVES

Primary: to quantify the changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure in children and adults taking amphetamines, compared to placebo. Secondary: to quantify the changes in heart rate in children and adults taking amphetamines, compared to placebo; to quantify the number of withdrawals due to adverse effects of amphetamine, compared to placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We used the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two clinical trial registers, together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify the studies included in the review. We imposed no restrictions on language, publication year or publication status. The latest search date was March 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of daily oral amphetamines versus placebo on blood pressure. There were no restrictions on participants' age or gender.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg) above atmospheric pressure; continuous outcomes). Secondary outcomes were heart rate (measured as beats per minute; continuous outcome) and withdrawals due to adverse effects (dichotomous outcome). We calculated continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We expressed withdrawals due to adverse effects as a risk ratio with 95% CI. We used a fixed-effect model to pool effect sizes from all studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 RCTs with a total of 10,583 participants, both adults and children. Most studies were conducted in North America (mainly the USA), followed by Europe. A few studies took place in Asia (Japan) and Australia. The studies tested racemic amphetamine, dextroamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, methyl​enedioxy​methamphetamine (MDMA) and methylphenidate. The amphetamines were prescribed for ADHD, weight loss and other indications. In 48 RCTs, blood pressure was measured within 24 hours of the last dose. Based on data from all included studies, amphetamines increased systolic blood pressure (SBP) by 1.93 mmHg (95% CI 1.54 to 2.31) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) by 1.84 mmHg (95% CI 1.51 to 2.16) (56 studies, 10,583 participants; high-certainty evidence for both). Amphetamines increased heart rate by 3.71 beats per minute (95% CI 3.27 to 4.14; 47 studies, 10,075 participants; high-certainty evidence). In a subgroup analysis limited to studies that gave participants amphetamines for at least eight weeks, the effects were similar, suggesting that these are sustained effects. These findings suggest that people taking daily oral amphetamines are at increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Participants in the amphetamine group were also more likely to withdraw from the study due to adverse effects compared to those given placebo (risk ratio 2.69, 95% CI 2.13 to 3.40; absolute risk increase of 4.3% over an average duration of 1 month; 42 studies, 8952 participants; high-certainty evidence). In general, the studies were well-executed, and the methodology was sound. We judged most studies to have a low risk of bias across most domains. Selection bias (random sequence generation and allocation concealment) was the domain most often rated as at unclear risk of bias, because the methods used were not reported. We judged 13 studies (23%) to have a high risk of bias in at least one of the seven domains, primarily due to high dropout rates, leading to a high risk of attrition bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Daily oral amphetamines increase blood pressure, heart rate, and withdrawals due to adverse effects, with these effects observed across all time points, including shorter (≤ four weeks) and longer durations (> four weeks to < eight weeks; ≥ eight weeks) of use. Future trials should measure blood pressure using 24-hour ambulatory monitoring and assess the effect of long-term use.

Amphetamine and methylphenidate potential on the recovery from stroke and traumatic brain injury: a review

The prevalence of stroke and traumatic brain injury is increasing worldwide. However, current treatments do not fully cure or stop their progression, acting mostly on symptoms. Amphetamine and methylphenidate are stimulants already approved for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and narcolepsy treatment, with neuroprotective potential and benefits when used in appropriate doses. This review aimed to summarize pre-clinical and clinical trials testing either amphetamine or methylphenidate for the treatment of stroke and traumatic brain injury. We used PubMed as a database and included the following keywords ((methylphenidate) OR (Ritalin) OR (Concerta) OR (Biphentin) OR (amphetamine) OR (Adderall)) AND ((stroke) OR (brain injury) OR (neuroplasticity)). Overall, studies provided inconsistent results regarding cognitive and motor function. Neurite outgrowth, synaptic proteins, dendritic complexity, and synaptic plasticity increases were reported in pre-clinical studies along with function improvement. Clinical trials have demonstrated that, depending on the brain region, there is an increase in motor activity, attention, and memory due to the stimulation of the functionally depressed catecholamine system and the activation of neuronal remodeling proteins. Nevertheless, more clinical trials and pre-clinical studies are needed to understand the drugs' full potential for their use in these brain diseases namely, to ascertain the treatment time window, ideal dosage, long-term effects, and mechanisms, while avoiding their addictive potential.

Pharmacotherapy to Improve Cognitive Functioning After Acquired Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

Cognitive impairments, common sequelae of acquired brain injury (ABI), significantly affect rehabilitation and quality of life. Currently, there is no solid evidence-base for pharmacotherapy to improve cognitive functioning after ABI, nevertheless off-label use is widely applied in clinical practice. This meta-analysis and meta-regression aims to quantitatively aggregate the available evidence for the effects of pharmacological agents used in the treatment of cognitive impairments following ABI. We conducted a comprehensive search of Embase, Medline Ovid, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases for randomized controlled and crossover trials. Meta-analytic effects were calculated for each pharmaceutical agent and targeted neuromodulator system. Cognitive outcome measures were aggregated across cognitive domains. Of 8,216 articles, 41 studies (4,434 patients) were included. The noradrenergic agent methylphenidate showed a small, significant positive effect on cognitive functioning in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI; k = 14, d = 0.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.56, P = 0.003). Specifically, methylphenidate was found to improve cognitive functions related to executive memory, baseline speed, inhibitory control, and variability in responding. The cholinergic drug donepezil demonstrated a large effect size, albeit based on a limited number of studies (k = 3, d = 1.68, P = 0.03). No significant effects were observed for other agents. Additionally, meta-regression analysis did not identify significant sources of heterogeneity in treatment response. Our meta-analysis supports the use of methylphenidate for enhancing cognitive functioning in patients with TBI. Although donepezil shows potential, it warrants further research. These results could guide clinical decision making, inform practice guidelines, and direct future pharmacotherapeutic research in ABI.

Effect of psychostimulant medications on physical function in children with cerebral palsy: scoping review

The aim of this scoping review is to examine the extent and depth of the literature on effects of central nervous system (CNS) stimulant medications on physical function in children with cerebral palsy (CP). A systematic search for relevant peer-reviewed studies was conducted of PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, SPORTDiscus, Embase, & Scopus (January 2002 & August 2022). We included studies that examined the effects of CNS stimulants on physical function in children with CP. Four studies met our selection criteria. All studies explored the effect of Modafinil on physical function outcomes. Three studies of the four included studies reported positive effects of Modafinil on spasticity, motor performance, and gait, whereas one study reported no significant effects of Modafinil. Our findings suggest that there is very low-quality evidence that suggests that Modafinil may enhance physical improvements in body structure and function, including reduction in spasticity and improvements in gait parameters. IMPACT: Central nervous system stimulants were examined for efficacy on physical function and spasticity in children with cerebral palsy. The evidence on the effects of central nervous system stimulants on physical function in children with CP is limited and inconsistent.

Protective effects of amphetamine and methylphenidate against dopaminergic neurotoxicants in SH-SY5Y cells

Full treatment of the second most common neurodegenerative disorder, Parkinson's disease (PD), is still considered an unmet need. As the psychostimulants, amphetamine (AMPH) and methylphenidate (MPH), were shown to be neuroprotective against stroke and other neuronal injury diseases, this study aimed to evaluate their neuroprotective potential against two dopaminergic neurotoxicants, 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA) and paraquat (PQ), in differentiated human dopaminergic SH-SY5Y cells. Neither cytotoxicity nor mitochondrial membrane potential changes were seen following a 24-hour exposure to either therapeutic concentration of AMPH or MPH (0.001-10 μM). On the other hand, a 24-hour exposure to 6-OHDA (31.25-500 μM) or PQ (100-5000 μM) induced concentration-dependent mitochondrial dysfunction, assessed by the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, and lysosomal damage, evaluated by the neutral red uptake assay. The lethal concentrations 25 and 50 retrieved from the concentration-toxicity curves in the MTT assay were 99.9 µM and 133.6 µM for 6-OHDA, or 422 µM and 585.8 µM for PQ. Both toxicants caused mitochondrial membrane potential depolarization, but only 6-OHDA increased reactive oxygen species (ROS). Most importantly, PQ-induced toxicity was partially prevented by 1 μM of AMPH or MPH. Nonetheless, neither AMPH nor MPH could prevent 6-OHDA toxicity in this experimental model. According to these findings, AMPH and MPH may provide some neuroprotection against PQ-induced neurotoxicity, but further investigation is required to determine the exact mechanism underlying this protection.

Poststroke Depression: An Update

The presence of neuropsychiatric disorders after stroke has been recognized for more than 100 years, but controlled systematic studies did not begin until the 1970s. The most clinically important advances, however, have been in the treatment and prevention of poststroke depression (PSD). Recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the treatment of PSD have demonstrated the efficacy of antidepressants. Similarly, RCTs for the prevention of PSD have shown that antidepressants significantly decrease the incidence of PSD compared with placebo. Early treatment of PSD with antidepressants also appears to enhance both physical and cognitive recovery from stroke and may increase survival up to 10 years. Genetic and epigenetic variations, white matter disease, cerebrovascular deregulation, altered neuroplasticity, and changes in glutamate neurotransmission may be relevant etiological factors.

Pathophysiology and Current Drug Treatments for Post-Stroke Depression: A Review

Post-stroke depression (PSD) is a biopsychosocial disorder that affects individuals who have suffered a stroke at any point. PSD has a 20 to 60 percent reported prevalence among stroke survivors. Its effects are usually adverse, can lead to disability, and may increase mortality if not managed or treated early. PSD is linked to several other medical conditions, including anxiety, hyper-locomotor activity, and poor functional recovery. Despite significant awareness of its adverse impacts, understanding the pathogenesis of PSD has proved challenging. The exact pathophysiology of PSD is unknown, yet its complexity has been definitively shown, involving mechanisms such as dysfunction of monoamine, the glutamatergic systems, the gut-brain axis, and neuroinflammation. The current effectiveness of PSD treatment is about 30-40 percent of all cases. In this review, we examined different pathophysiological mechanisms and current pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches for the treatment of PSD.

Stability of extemporaneously prepared preservative-free methylphenidate 5 mg/mL intravenous solution

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles , AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

To advance the implementation of consciousness-promoting therapies in patients with acute disorders of consciousness, the availability of potential therapeutic agents in formulations suitable for administration in hospitalized patients in the presence of complex comorbid conditions is paramount. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the long-term stability of extemporaneously prepared preservative-free methylphenidate hydrochloride (HCl) 5 mg/mL intravenous solution for experimental use.

METHODS

A methylphenidate 5 mg/mL solution was prepared under proper aseptic techniques with Methylphenidate Hydrochloride, USP, powder mixed in sterile water for solution. Methylphenidate HCl 5 mg/mL solution was sterilized by filtration technique under USP <797>-compliant conditions. Samples were stored refrigerated (2-8°C) and analyzed at approximately days 1, 30, 60, 90, 180, and 365. At each time point, chemical and physical stability were evaluated by visual inspection, pH measurement, membrane filtration procedure, turbidometric or photometric technique, and high-performance liquid chromatography analysis.

RESULTS

Over the 1-year study period, the samples retained 96.76% to 102.04% of the initial methylphenidate concentration. There was no significant change in the visual appearance, pH level, or particulate matter during the study period. The sterility of samples was maintained and endotoxin levels were undetectable throughout the 1-year stability period.

CONCLUSION

Extemporaneously prepared preservative-free methylphenidate 5 mg/mL intravenous solution was physically and chemically stable at 32, 61, 95, 186, and 365 days when stored in amber glass vials at refrigerated temperatures (2-8°C).

Depression after stroke

Stroke treatment has dramatically improved in recent decades. However, although new treatments have reduced its mortality and the severity of its physical and cognitive sequelae, many people still have incapacitating disabilities following a stroke. Depression is the most common psychiatric disorder following stroke; it is important to recognise and treat as it limits motor and cognitive rehabilitation. Antidepressant medication is an effective treatment and can improve adherence to clinically recommended physical and cognitive tasks, thereby enhancing functional remodelling of neuronal pathways and improving rehabilitation outcomes.

Pharmacological management of post-stroke depression: an update of the evidence and clinical guidance

Introduction: Post-stroke depression (PSD) is common, serious and of considerable high risk of being chronic. Pharmacological treatment is highly recommended (class I recommendation) based on level B evidence. Still, treatment is often insufficient and the diagnosis can be challenging.Areas covered: The present paper is an update on pharmacological treatment of PSD and a review of recent clinical guidelines. To put this into perspective, the authors highlight the risk factors that might help clinicians identify patients with PSD, and discuss pharmacological prevention, functional outcome, and safety of antidepressant treatment in stroke patients.Expert opinion: Although there are still gaps in our knowledge of PSD, the seriousness should not be neglected, and pharmacological treatment should be recommended when relevant. A selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) is first choice, but is not always tolerated or effective. Close follow-up and dose adjustments as well as add-on possibilities are therefore important aspects of treatment as well. Antidepressant treatment prevents PSD but the effect on enhancement of stroke recovery is less clear.

Neuropsychiatric Complications after Stroke

Neuropsychiatric disturbances represent a common and uniquely challenging consequence of stroke. These disorders arise at the intersection of lesion-related brain dysfunction and psychological distress related to the event and its aftermath, making it difficult to identify what symptom is a direct physiological consequence of the stroke. Depression, anxiety, fatigue, apathy, emotionalism, and anger are the most common of these syndromes, and posttraumatic stress disorder related to the stroke event has become increasingly recognized as a relevant entity. Mania, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and psychosis are less commonly encountered but potentially highly debilitating conditions that may be underrecognized. Early identification and treatment may mitigate functional impairment and improve quality of life. Evidence-based guidelines from the general population are often relied upon to guide treatment. Further research is needed to understand and tailor treatment of these disorders in the poststroke population.

Effect of Qizhitongluo capsule on lower limb rehabilitation after stroke: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

An individual's level of lower limb motor function is associated with his or her disability level after stroke, and motor improvement may lead to a better prognosis and quality of life. Data from animal models show that Qizhitongluo (QZTL) capsule facilitates recovery after focal brain injury. We aimed to validate the efficacy and safety of the QZTL capsule for promoting lower limb motor recovery in poststroke patients.

METHODS

In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial from 13 sites in China, participants with ischemic stroke and Fugl-Meyer motor scale (FMMS) scores of <95 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1:1 ratio to the QZTL group, Naoxintong (NXT) group or placebo group for 12 weeks at 15-28 days after the onset of stroke. The primary outcome was the change in the Lower Limb FMMS (FMMS-LL) score from baseline over the 12-week intervention period.

RESULTS

622 participants were randomly assigned to the QZTL group (309), NXT group (159), or placebo group (154). The FMMS-LL score increased by 4.81 points (95 % CI, 4.27-5.35) in the QZTL group, by 3.77 points (95 % CI, 3.03-4.51) in the NXT group and by 3.00 points (95 % CI, 3.03-4.51) in the placebo group at week 12. The QZTL group showed significantly larger improvements compared with the placebo group at each interview from weeks 4-12 (difference, 0.89 [0.30,1.49] at week 4, P = 0.0032; difference, 1.83[1.01,2.66] at 90 days poststroke, P < 0.0001; difference, 1.81[0.88,2.74] at week 12, P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The QZTL capsule is an effective treatment for lower limb motor impairment. The finding indicates that the QZTL capsule may be used as a potential new strategy for stroke rehabilitation.

A Review of Pharmacologic Neurostimulant Use During Rehabilitation and Recovery After Brain Injury

OBJECTIVE

To describe the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic neurostimulants after neurological injuries such as ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI), critically evaluate the available literature, and make recommendations regarding which neurostimulants should be considered for use in clinical practice.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search of PubMed was performed (1953 to October 2020) to identify relevant articles. Search terms included the following: "neurostimulant, neurorehabilitation" AND "traumatic brain injury, cerebrovascular accident, or stroke." This review is limited to prospective studies and observational trials.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant English-language studies conducted in humans were considered.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Cognitive and motor deficits caused by stroke and TBI account for high rates of long-term disability. Although not well-established, pharmacologic agents, broadly characterized as neurostimulants, may be prescribed after brain injury to treat these deficits. When prescribing these medications, it is imperative to be aware of the supporting evidence in order to accurately gauge the risk-benefit profile of each agent.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

The following presents a literature review critically evaluating clinical studies that investigate neurostimulant use after brain injury. The intent of this review is to serve as an evidence-based guide for clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacologic agent with the most supporting literature is amantadine used for cognitive improvement after TBI. Other neurostimulants with positive, despite more limited, evidence include methylphenidate, modafinil, levodopa, and citalopram. Caution is warranted with other neurostimulants given higher rates of adverse effects or lack of benefit observed in clinical trials.

Hemispheric stroke: Mood disorders

Stroke causes many forms of disability, including emotional and mood disorders. Depression is the most common of these, affecting approximately one-third of stroke patients. Other disorders like mania, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, or apathy may also develop following stroke, although they are less common. The development of mood and emotional disorders is dependent on the severity of brain injury, the side of injury, and hemispheric location. Whereas a left hemispheric stroke often results in depression or a catastrophic reaction with anxiety, injury to the right hemisphere has predominantly been associated with the development of emotional indifference (anosodiaphoria) or euphoria. In this chapter, we discuss the mood disorders associated with hemispheric strokes and the neuropsychological mechanisms that might account for the clinical manifestations of these affective disorders.

Amphetamine-induced alteration to gaze parameters: A novel conceptual pathway and implications for naturalistic behavior

Amphetamine produces a multiplicity of well-documented end-order biochemical, pharmacological and biobehavioural effects. Mechanistically, amphetamine downregulates presynaptic and postsynaptic striatal monoamine (primarily dopaminergic) systems, producing alterations to key brain regions which manifest as stereotyped ridged behaviour which occurs under both acute and chronic dosing schedules and persists beyond detoxification. Despite evidence of amphetamine-induced visual attentional dysfunction, no conceptual synthesis has yet captured how characteristic pharmaco-behavioural processes are critically implicated via these pathways, nor described the potential implications for safety-sensitive behaviours. Drawing on known pathomechanisms, we propose a cross-disciplinary, novel conceptual functional system framework for delineating the biobehavioural consequences of amphetamine use on visual attentional capacity and discuss the implications for functional and behavioural outcomes. Specifically, we highlight the manifest implications for behaviours that are conceptually driven and highly dependent on visual information processing for timely execution of visually-guided movements. Following this, we highlight the potential impact on safety-sensitive, but common behaviours, such as driving a motor vehicle. The close pathophysiological relationship between oculomotor control and higher-order cognitive processes further suggests that dynamic measurement of movement related to the motion of the eye (gaze behaviour) may be a simple, effective and direct measure of behavioural performance capabilities in naturalistic settings. Consequently, we discuss the potential efficacy of ocular monitoring for the detection and monitoring of driver states for this drug user group, and potential wider application. Significance statement: We propose a novel biochemical-physiological-behavioural pathway which delineates how amphetamine use critically alters oculomotor function, visual-attentional performance and information processing capabilities. Given the manifest implications for behaviours that are conceptually driven and highly dependent on these processes, we recommend oculography as a novel means of detecting and monitoring gaze behaviours during naturalistic tasks such as driving. Real-word examination of gaze behaviour therefore present as an effective means to detect driver impairment and prevent performance degradation due to these drugs.

Pharmacological, psychological and non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for preventing depression after stroke

BACKGROUND

Depression is an important consequence of stroke that influences recovery yet often is not detected, or is inadequately treated. This is an update and expansion of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective is to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, or combinations of these interventions reduce the incidence of diagnosable depression after stroke. Secondary objectives are to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation or combinations of these interventions reduce levels of depressive symptoms and dependency, and improve physical functioning after stroke. We also aim to determine the safety of, and adherence to, the interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Register of Cochrane Stroke and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis (last searched August 2018). In addition, we searched the following databases; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2018), Embase (1980 to August 2018), PsycINFO (1967 to August 2018), CINAHL (1982 to August 2018) and three Web of Science indexes (2002 to August 2018). We also searched reference lists, clinical trial registers (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); to August 2018 and ClinicalTrials.gov; to August 2018), conference proceedings; we also contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: 1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; 2) one of various forms of psychological therapy with usual care and/or attention control; 3) one of various forms of non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; 4) a pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with a pharmacological intervention and usual care and/or attention control; 5) non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; 6) pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; 7) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo plus non-invasive brain stimulation; 8) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation plus usual care and/or attention control; and 9) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care plus psychological therapy, with the intention of preventing depression after stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I² statistic and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs (21 interventions), with 1771 participants in the review. Data were available for 12 pharmacological trials (14 interventions) and seven psychological trials. There were no trials of non-invasive brain stimulation compared with sham stimulation or usual care, a combination of pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy, or a combination of non-invasive brain stimulation and a pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care to prevent depression after stroke. Treatment effects were observed on the primary outcome of meeting the study criteria for depression at the end of treatment: there is very low-certainty evidence from eight trials (nine interventions) that pharmacological interventions decrease the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68; 734 participants) compared to placebo. There is very low-certainty evidence from two trials that psychological interventions reduce the proportion of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94, 607 participants) compared to usual care and/or attention control. Eight trials (nine interventions) found no difference in death and other adverse events between pharmacological intervention and placebo groups (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.91; 496 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence. Five trials found no difference in psychological intervention and usual care and/or attention control groups for death and other adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.91; 975 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that pharmacological interventions and psychological therapy may prevent depression and improve mood after stroke. However, there is very low certainty in these conclusions because of the very low-certainty evidence. More trials are required before reliable recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments after stroke.

The effectiveness of methylphenidate in improving cognition after brain injury in adults: a systematic review

Objective: To conduct a systematic review investigating the effectiveness of methylphenidate in improving cognition following brain injury in an adult population.Data sources: CINAHL, PsychINFO, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were searched for all relevant articles published from January 1980 up to December 2017.Study selection: Studies were included if participants had a diagnosis of new onset or previous acquired brain injury and were age 16 or over. Studies must have administered methylphenidate and measured its effectiveness on cognition using at least one measure of cognitive function.Data extraction: Data extracted included study design, sample size, participant characteristics, intervention method, outcome measures, and findings. The quality of included randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database. An overall level of evidence was assigned using a modified Sackett scale.Data synthesis: Included studies consisted of seven randomized controlled trials, two pre-post trials, one prospective controlled trial, and one case study. All included studies reported improved cognitive abilities following methylphenidate treatment post-injury.Conclusions: There is the strongest level of evidence (Level 1a) suggesting methylphenidate may alleviate cognitive impairments in adults with brain injury. However, longitudinal studies are warranted examining the effectiveness and safety of long-term methylphenidate use in this population.

Effects of Dopamine on Motor Recovery and Training in Adults and Children With Nonprogressive Neurological Injuries: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The strong link between dopamine and motor learning has been well-established in the animal literature with similar findings reported in healthy adults and the elderly.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct the first, to our knowledge, systematic review of the literature on the evidence for the effects of dopaminergic medications or genetic variations in dopamine transmission on motor recovery or learning after a nonprogressive neurological injury.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted up until April 2018 for all English articles including participants with nonprogressive neurological injury such as cerebral palsy, stroke, spinal cord injury, and traumatic brain injury; quantitative motor outcomes; and assessments of the dopaminergic system or medications.

RESULTS

The search yielded 237 articles, from which we identified 26 articles meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria. The vast majority of articles were related to the use of levodopa poststroke; however, several studies assessed the effects of different medications and/or were on individuals with traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury or cerebral palsy.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that a brain injury can decrease dopamine transmission and that levodopa may have a positive effect on motor outcomes poststroke, although evidence is not conclusive or consistent. Individual variations in genes related to dopamine transmission may also influence the response to motor skill training during neurorehabilitation and the extent to which dopaminergic medications or interventions can augment that response. More rigorous safety and efficacy studies of levodopa and dopaminergic medications in stroke and particularly other neurological injuries including genetic analyses are warranted.

The Intersection of Central Dopamine System and Stroke: Potential Avenues Aiming at Enhancement of Motor Recovery

Dopamine, a major neurotransmitter, plays a role in a wide range of brain sensorimotor functions. Parkinson's disease and schizophrenia are two major human neuropsychiatric disorders typically associated with dysfunctional dopamine activity levels, which can be alleviated through the druggability of the dopaminergic systems. Meanwhile, several studies suggest that optimal brain dopamine activity levels are also significantly impacted in other serious neurological conditions, notably stroke, but this has yet to be fully appreciated at both basic and clinical research levels. This is of utmost importance as there is a need for better treatments to improve recovery from stroke. Here, we discuss the state of knowledge regarding the modulation of dopaminergic systems following stroke, and the use of dopamine boosting therapies in animal stroke models to improve stroke recovery. Indeed, studies in animals and humans show stroke leads to changes in dopamine functioning. Moreover, evidence from animal stroke models suggests stimulation of dopamine receptors may be a promising therapeutic approach for enhancing motor recovery from stroke. With respect to the latter, we discuss the evidence for several possible receptor-linked mechanisms by which improved motor recovery may be mediated. One avenue of particular promise is the subtype-selective stimulation of dopamine receptors in conjunction with physical therapy. However, results from clinical trials so far have been more mixed due to a number of potential reasons including, targeting of the wrong patient populations and use of drugs which modulate a wide array of receptors. Notwithstanding these issues, it is hoped that future research endeavors will assist in the development of more refined dopaminergic therapeutic approaches to enhance stroke recovery.

Effects of Central Nervous System Drugs on Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pilot trials have suggested that pharmacotherapy may aid stroke recovery. The aim of this study was to systematically review the effects of antidepressants, anti-Alzheimer drugs, anti-Parkinson drugs, central nervous system (CNS) stimulants and piracetam on gross motor function, cognition, disability, dependency and quality of life (QOL) after stroke.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched, and 44 randomized controlled trials that compared outcomes of interest between drug treatment and placebo or no treatment were included. For each study, standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool results using either the fixed-effects or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) improved gross motor function (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.22-0.85; three studies), disability (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.32-0.66; 14 studies) and QOL (MD 6.46, 95% CI 4.71-8.22; two studies), but there was insufficient evidence for their use in enhancing global cognition (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.46; five studies) and dependency (risk ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97; one fluoxetine study). In particular, gross motor function was improved by fluoxetine (SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.31-0.98; two studies), while disability was improved by paroxetine (SMD 1.05, 95% CI 0.63-1.46; two studies), citalopram (SMD 0.51, 95% CI 0.08-0.93; two studies) and fluoxetine (SMD 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.60; nine studies). There is insufficient evidence for the use of anti-Alzheimer drugs, anti-Parkinson drugs, CNS stimulants and piracetam to promote stroke recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of SSRIs may improve gross motor function, reduce disability and enhance QOL for patients recovering from stroke.

Beyond ADHD and narcolepsy: psychostimulants in general psychiatry

Psychostimulants (dexamphetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil) reduce fatigue, promote alertness and wakefulness, and have possible mood-enhancing properties. In modern psychiatric practice, their use has been limited to attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and sleep disorders such as narcolepsy. Despite this, research has continued into psychostimulant use in general psychiatry, especially in the treatment of depression and fatigue. This article reviews the recent literature regarding psychostimulant use in general and consultation-liaison psychiatry. Although psychostimulants continue to attract clinical research, there is currently not enough evidence to recommend their routine use for general psychiatric conditions.

Effects of monoaminergic drugs on training-induced motor cortex plasticity in older adults

Primary motor cortex (M1) plasticity is involved in motor learning and stroke motor recovery, and enhanced by increasing monoaminergic transmission. Age impacts these processes but there is a paucity of systematic studies on the effects of monoaminergic drugs in older adults. Here, in ten older adults (age 61+4years, 4 males), we determine the effects of a single oral dose of carbidopa/levodopa (DOPA), d-amphetamine (AMPH), methylphenidate (MEPH) and placebo (PLAC) on M1 excitability and motor training-induced M1 plasticity. M1 plasticity is defined as training related long lasting changes in M1 excitability and kinematics of the trained movement. At peak plasma level of the drugs, subjects trained wrist extension movements for 30min. Outcome measures were motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation at increasing intensity (stimulus response curve, SRC) and peak acceleration of the trained wrist extension movements. Measures were obtained before and after completion of training. The curve parameters plateau (MEPmax), inflection point, and slope were extracted from SRC. At baseline drugs had a differential effect on curve parameters, while kinematics remained unchanged. Training alone (PLAC) increased MEPmax but did not improve kinematics. Drugs affected training-related changes of the curve parameters differently, but did not enhance them or kinematics when compared to PLAC. The results demonstrate that in the older adults, MEPH, DOPA, or AMPH have differential effects on baseline M1 excitability and training-related M1 plasticity but fail to enhance them above the naïve level.

Poststroke Depression: A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Poststroke depression (PSD) is common, affecting approximately one third of stroke survivors at any one time after stroke. Individuals with PSD are at a higher risk for suboptimal recovery, recurrent vascular events, poor quality of life, and mortality. Although PSD is prevalent, uncertainty remains regarding predisposing risk factors and optimal strategies for prevention and treatment. This is the first scientific statement from the American Heart Association on the topic of PSD. Members of the writing group were appointed by the American Heart Association Stroke Council's Scientific Statements Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association's Manuscript Oversight Committee. Members were assigned topics relevant to their areas of expertise and reviewed appropriate literature, references to published clinical and epidemiology studies, clinical and public health guidelines, authoritative statements, and expert opinion. This multispecialty statement provides a comprehensive review of the current evidence and gaps in current knowledge of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, outcomes, management, and prevention of PSD, and provides implications for clinical practice.

The neurophysiological effects of single-dose theophylline in patients with chronic stroke: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over study

BACKGROUND

Reducing inhibitory neurotransmission with pharmacological agents is a potential approach for augmenting plasticity after stroke. Previous work in healthy subjects showed diminished intracortical inhibition after administration of theophylline.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the effect of single-dose theophylline on intracortical and interhemispheric inhibition in patients with chronic stroke, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study.

METHODS

Eighteen subjects were randomly administered 300 mg of extended-release theophylline or placebo. Immediately and 5 hours following administration, transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to assess bihemispheric resting motor threshold, short-interval intracortical inhibition, long-interval intracortical inhibition, and interhemispheric inhibition. Adverse effects on cardiovascular, neurological, and motor performance outcomes were also surveilled. Change between morning and afternoon sessions were compared across conditions. One week later, patients underwent the same assessments after crossing over to the opposite experimental condition. Subjects and investigators were blinded to the experimental condition during data acquisition and analysis.

RESULTS

For both hemispheres, changes in intracortical or interhemispheric neurophysiology were comparable under theophylline and placebo conditions. Theophylline induced no adverse neurological, cardiovascular, or motor performance effects. For both conditions and hemipsheres, the baseline level of inhibition inversely correlated with its change between sessions: less baseline inhibition (i.e. disinhibition) was associated with a strengthening in inhibition over the day, and vice versa.

CONCLUSION

A single dose of theophylline is well-tolerated by patients with chronic stroke, but does not alter cortical excitability. The inverse relationship between baseline inhibition and its change suggests the existence of a homeostatic process. The lack of effect on cortical inhibition may be related to an insufficiently long exposure to theophylline, or to differential responsiveness of disinhibited neural circuitry in patients with stroke.

Enhancing Recovery after Stroke with Noradrenergic Pharmacotherapy: A New Frontier?

Despite much progress in stroke prevention and acute intervention, recovery and rehabilitation have traditionally received relatively little scientific attention. There is now increasing interest in the development of stroke recovery drugs and innovative rehabilitation techniques to promote functional recovery after completed stroke. Experimental work over the past two decades indicates that pharmacologic intervention to enhance recovery may be possible in the subacute stage, days to weeks poststroke, after irreversible injury has occurred. This paper discusses the concept of “rehabilitation pharmacology” and reviews the growing literature from animal studies and pilot clinical trials on noradrenergic pharmacotherapy, a new experimental strategy in stroke rehabilitation. Amphetamine, a monoamine agonist that increases brain norepinephrine levels, is the most extensively studied drug shown to promote recovery of function in animal models of focal brain injury. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanisms and clinical efficacy of amphetamine and other novel therapeutic interventions on the recovery process.

Stroke Rehabilitation 2007: What Should it Be?

Background

There are an estimated 62 million stroke survivors worldwide. The majority will have long-term disability. Despite this reality, there have been few large, high-quality randomized controlled trials of stroke rehabilitation interventions.

Summary of review

There is excellent evidence for the effectiveness of a number of stroke rehabilitation interventions, notably care of stroke patients in inpatient stroke units and stroke rehabilitation units providing organized, goal-focused care via a multidisciplinary team. Stroke units (in comparison with care on general medical wards) effectively reduce death and disability with the number needed to treat to prevent one person from failing to regain independence being 20. Unfortunately, only a minority of stroke patients have access to stroke unit care. The key principles of effective stroke rehabilitation have been identified. These include ( 1 ) a functional approach targeted at specific activities e.g. walking, activities of daily living, ( 2 ) frequent and intense practice, and ( 3 ) commencement in the first days or weeks after stroke.

Conclusion

The most effective approaches to restoration of brain function after stroke remain unknown and there is an urgent need for more high-quality research. In the meantime, simple, broadly applicable stroke rehabilitation interventions with proven efficacy, particularly stroke unit care, must be applied more widely.

Genetics as a molecular window into recovery, its treatment, and stress responses after stroke

Stroke remains a major source of adult disability in the USA and worldwide. Most patients show some recovery during the weeks to months following a stroke, but this is generally incomplete. An emerging branch of therapeutics targets the processes underlying this behavioral recovery from stroke toward the goal of reducing long-term disability. A key factor hampering these efforts is the very large degree of variability between stroke survivors. Available data suggest that genetic differences could explain an important fraction of the differences between subjects. The current review considers this from several angles, including genetic differences in relation to drugs that promote recovery. Genetic factors related to physiological and psychological stress responses may also be critically important to understanding recovery after stroke and its treatment. The studies reviewed provide insights into recovery and suggest directions for further research to improve clinical decision-making in this setting. Genetic differences between patients might be used to help clinical trials select specific patient subgroups, on a biological basis, in order to sharpen the precision with which new treatments are evaluated. Pharmacogenomic factors might also provide insights into inter-subject differences in treatment side effects for pharmacological prescriptions, and behavioral interventions, and others. These efforts must be conducted with the strictest ethical standards given the highly sensitive nature of genetic data. Understanding the effect of selected genetic measures could improve a clinician's ability to predict the risk and efficacy of a restorative therapy and to make maximally informed decisions, and in so doing, facilitate individual patient care.

The potential utility of some legal highs in CNS disorders

Over the last decade there has been an explosion of new drugs of abuse, so called legal highs or novel psychoactive substances (NPS). Many of these abused drugs have unknown pharmacology, but their biological effects can be anticipated from their molecular structure and possibly also from online user reports. When considered with the findings that some prescription medications are increasingly abused and that some abused drugs have been tested clinically one could argue that there has been a blurring of the line between drugs of abuse and clinically used drugs. In this review we examine these legal highs/NPS and consider whether, based on their known or predicted pharmacology, some might have the potential to be clinically useful in CNS disorders.

The role of methylphenidate in depression

Introduction

Depression is a burdening disease state where up to 30% of individuals do not respond to first-line treatment. Adjunctive use of psychostimulants has been investigated for the treatment of depression in patient populations, including those with treatment-resistant depression or terminal illness. The purpose of this paper is to present a review of the literature on the efficacy of using methylphenidate to manage depression.

Methods

A search was conducted in PubMed, Ovid/MEDLINE, and PsychINFO using the following key words: psychostimulants, stimulants, methylphenidate, alternative therapy, depression, and major depressive disorder. All reports included were published before June 30, 2015.

Results

For this review 10 reports, including randomized controlled, case series, and retrospective chart review studies, were identified and assessed. Patient populations studied included patients with treatment-resistant depression, patients with terminal illness, geriatric patients, and patients with miscellaneous indications, such as history of stroke and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), or acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). For treatment-resistant depression, treatment differences for fatigue and apathy in favor of methylphenidate were found, but no difference was found for response rates in depression. Additionally, in palliative care and hospice patients, methylphenidate was found to improve fatigue and depressive symptoms. Patients with other conditions (poststroke and HIV patients) achieved some relief of depressive symptoms.

Conclusion

The efficacy data for methylphenidate in depression are limited, with inconsistent results in specific patient populations that limit external validity. At this time, it should not be recommended as first-line treatment in depression. Future research should be developed focusing on long-term safety and efficacy in nonspecialized patient populations.

Closing the Gap Between Research and Clinical Practice

Evidence-based practice and the application of research findings to practice is a major focus of attention in health care today. The quantification of variations in service delivery and the economic implications of these variations contribute to the pressure on clinicians to provide evidence-based care whenever possible. Awareness of the development of evidence-based practice (EBP), the need for EBP, factors that affect EBP, the methods used to translate research into practice, EBP quality indicators, barriers to EBP, and benefits of EBP will assist clinicians in the effective use of evidence-based information in the care of their patients.

Mental Status and Behavioral Changes in the Early Postacute Phase of Care

Neurocognitive sequelae of stroke create a significant impact on the patient and frequently disrupt recovery from the physical manifestations. This article strives to review types of neurocognitive changes after stroke and discuss the underlying pathophysiology. Management options are presented for the diverse changes that may be encountered.

Motor Recovery Strategies After Stroke

Impaired motor function after stroke is a major cause of disability in young stroke survivors. The plasticity of the adult human brain provides opportunities to enhance traditional rehabilitation programs for these individuals. Younger stroke patients appear to have a greater ability to recover from stroke and are likely to benefit substantially from treatments that facilitate plasticity-mediated recovery. The use of new exercise treatments, such as constraint-induced movement therapy, robot-aided rehabilitation, and partial body weight supported treadmill training are being studied intensively and are likely to ultimately be incorporated into standard poststroke rehabilitation. Medications to enhance recovery, growth factors, and stem cells will also be components of rehabilitation for the young stroke survivor in the foreseeable future.

Neurostimulant Medication Usage During Stroke Rehabilitation: The Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Outcomes Project (PSROP)

Motor recovery after a stroke depends upon many upon different modalities. Intensive therapy using compensatory and facilitatory techniques is the primary method to improve movement and function in affected extremities. However, medications used to modulate neurotransmitters may be useful in augmenting therapy approaches. The Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Outcomes Project (PSROP) database was used to describe the frequency of prescribing neurostimulant medications; the types of neurostimulant medications used; and how the use of neurostimulant medications affected rehabilitation length of stay, motor recovery, cognitive recovery, and discharge destination. Of the 1,161 patients in the PSROP database, 929 (80.0%) patients did not receive any treatment with methylphenidate, modafinil, levodopa, amantadine, or bromocriptine. Patients who received neurostimulant medications did not have any more significant changes in length of stay, motor recovery, cognitive recovery, or discharge destination than patients who did not receive neurostimulant medications. Much research needs to be completed before clinicians know precisely whether and how rehabilitation therapies and medications interact to assist in functional recovery.

The use of stimulant medications for non-core aspects of ADHD and in other disorders

Psychostimulants play a central role in the management of ADHD. Here we review the evidence pertaining to the use of methylphenidate, dexamphetamine and related amphetamine salts, the prodrug lisdexamfetamine and modafinil for the management of comorbid ADHD and non-ADHD indications. There is a growing consensus that stimulant medications are helpful at improving the emotional dysregulation and lability, and oppositional and conduct symptoms that are often associated with ADHD. There is some evidence that psychostimulants may improve outcomes in those with treatment resistant depression, reduce negative symptoms and improve cognitive performance in schizophrenia, and that methylphenidate may reduce binge eating in those with bulimia nervosa. In general medicine, whilst the evidence is at times contradictory, psychostimulants have been shown in some studies to be effective treatments for chronic fatigue and narcolepsy, and to improve outcomes post stroke, post head injury, in dementia and various cancers. It seems likely that these effects often result from a combination of, reduction in fatigue, improvements in concentration and cognitive functioning and a lifting of mood which may be a direct or indirect consequence of the medication. Further studies seem warranted and these should focus on efficacy, effectiveness and long term safety. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'CNS Stimulants'.

Pharmacogenetics of neural injury recovery

Relatively few pharmacological agents are part of routine care for neural injury, although several are used or under consideration in acute stroke, chronic stroke, traumatic brain injury and secondary stroke prevention. Tissue plasminogen activator is approved for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke, and genetic variants may impact the efficacy and safety of this drug. In the chronic phase of stroke, several drugs such as L-dopa, fluoxetine and donepezil are under investigation for enhancing rehabilitation therapy, with varying levels of evidence. One potential reason for the mixed efficacy displayed by these drugs may be the influence of genetic factors that were not considered in prior studies. An understanding of the genetics impacting the efficacy of dopaminergic, serotonergic and cholinergic drugs may allow clinicians to target these potential therapies to those patients most likely to benefit. In the setting of stroke prevention, which is directly linked to neural injury recovery, the most highly studied pharmacogenomic interactions pertain to clopidogrel and warfarin. Incorporating pharmacogenomics into neural injury recovery has the potential to maximize the benefit of several current and potential pharmacological therapies and to refine the choice of pharmacological agent that may be used to enhance benefits from rehabilitation therapy.

Combination of transcranial direct current stimulation and methylphenidate in subacute stroke

Noninvasive transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and methylphenidate (MP) are associated with motor recovery after stroke. Based on the potentially complementary mechanisms of these interventions, we examined whether there is an interactive effect between MP and tDCS. In this preliminary study, we randomized subacute stroke subjects to receive tDCS alone, MP alone or combination of tDCS and MP. A blinded rater measured safety, hand function, and cortical excitability before and after treatment. None of the treatments caused any major or severe adverse effects or induced significant differences in cortical excitability. Analysis of variance of gain score, as measured by Purdue pegboard test, showed a significant between-group difference (F(2,6)=12.167, p=0.008). Post hoc analysis showed that the combination treatment effected greater Purdue pegboard gain scores than tDCS alone (p=0.017) or MP alone (p=0.01). Our preliminary data with nine subjects shows an interesting dissociation between motor function improvement and lack of motor corticospinal plasticity changes as indexed by transcranial magnetic stimulation in subacute stroke subjects.