Objective: To investigate the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on motor coordination in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: In this single-site, open-label, naturalistic follow-up study, 157 children (7.6±1.4 years; 139 males) with ADHD were recruited between March 2015 and May 2020 from the Department of Psychiatry, Asan Medical Center, and treated for 12 weeks with methylphenidate (n=48) or atomoxetine (n=109). Children completed the Advanced Test of Attention (ATA), and caregivers completed the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS) questionnaire and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) at baseline and at 12 weeks. Paired t-tests, a mixed-effects model, and linear regression were used to compare treatment groups and assess factors influencing motor coordination changes. Results: Methylphenidate and atomoxetine resulted in significant improvement in DCDQ fine motor/handwriting, general coordination, and total scores over 12 weeks. Fine motor/handwriting had a significant main effect for time (F1=16.64, p<0.001, η2=0.097); however, the interaction effect between group and time was not significant (F1=0.24, p=0.625, η2=0.002). Changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.174, p=0.029) and auditory commission errors of ATA (β=0.191, p=0.022) were significantly associated with changes in fine motor/handwriting. Additionally, changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.177, p=0.034) and rater-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.198, p=0.017) were significant predictors of improvements in general coordination in separate models. Conclusion Methylphenidate and atomoxetine had a positive effect on motor coordination in children with ADHD. Improvement in motor coordination was associated with ADHD symptom improvement.

Objective: To investigate the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on motor coordination in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: In this single-site, open-label, naturalistic follow-up study, 157 children (7.6±1.4 years; 139 males) with ADHD were recruited between March 2015 and May 2020 from the Department of Psychiatry, Asan Medical Center, and treated for 12 weeks with methylphenidate (n=48) or atomoxetine (n=109). Children completed the Advanced Test of Attention (ATA), and caregivers completed the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS) questionnaire and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) at baseline and at 12 weeks. Paired t-tests, a mixed-effects model, and linear regression were used to compare treatment groups and assess factors influencing motor coordination changes. Results: Methylphenidate and atomoxetine resulted in significant improvement in DCDQ fine motor/handwriting, general coordination, and total scores over 12 weeks. Fine motor/handwriting had a significant main effect for time (F1=16.64, p<0.001, η2=0.097); however, the interaction effect between group and time was not significant (F1=0.24, p=0.625, η2=0.002). Changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.174, p=0.029) and auditory commission errors of ATA (β=0.191, p=0.022) were significantly associated with changes in fine motor/handwriting. Additionally, changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.177, p=0.034) and rater-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.198, p=0.017) were significant predictors of improvements in general coordination in separate models. Conclusion Methylphenidate and atomoxetine had a positive effect on motor coordination in children with ADHD. Improvement in motor coordination was associated with ADHD symptom improvement.

Objective: To investigate the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on motor coordination in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: In this single-site, open-label, naturalistic follow-up study, 157 children (7.6±1.4 years; 139 males) with ADHD were recruited between March 2015 and May 2020 from the Department of Psychiatry, Asan Medical Center, and treated for 12 weeks with methylphenidate (n=48) or atomoxetine (n=109). Children completed the Advanced Test of Attention (ATA), and caregivers completed the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS) questionnaire and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) at baseline and at 12 weeks. Paired t-tests, a mixed-effects model, and linear regression were used to compare treatment groups and assess factors influencing motor coordination changes. Results: Methylphenidate and atomoxetine resulted in significant improvement in DCDQ fine motor/handwriting, general coordination, and total scores over 12 weeks. Fine motor/handwriting had a significant main effect for time (F1=16.64, p<0.001, η2=0.097); however, the interaction effect between group and time was not significant (F1=0.24, p=0.625, η2=0.002). Changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.174, p=0.029) and auditory commission errors of ATA (β=0.191, p=0.022) were significantly associated with changes in fine motor/handwriting. Additionally, changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.177, p=0.034) and rater-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.198, p=0.017) were significant predictors of improvements in general coordination in separate models. Conclusion Methylphenidate and atomoxetine had a positive effect on motor coordination in children with ADHD. Improvement in motor coordination was associated with ADHD symptom improvement.

This review highlights the current and emerging pharmacological treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Stimulants such as methylphenidate are the first-line treatment for improving attention and behavior. Non-stimulants, such as atomoxetine serve as alternative options, particularly for patients with comorbid conditions or those intolerant to stimulants. Emerging treatments, not yet available in Korea, include the methylphenidate prodrug, delayed-release/extended-release methylphenidate, and transdermal dextroamphetamine, that provide innovative delivery systems for sustained symptom control. Additionally, novel drugs such as viloxazine and centanafadine show promise as alternatives with potentially fewer side effects, broadening the spectrum of available therapies. As these new medications become accessible, they may help develop more personalized treatment plans tailored to individual patient needs and potential side effects.

This review highlights the current and emerging pharmacological treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Stimulants such as methylphenidate are the first-line treatment for improving attention and behavior. Non-stimulants, such as atomoxetine serve as alternative options, particularly for patients with comorbid conditions or those intolerant to stimulants. Emerging treatments, not yet available in Korea, include the methylphenidate prodrug, delayed-release/extended-release methylphenidate, and transdermal dextroamphetamine, that provide innovative delivery systems for sustained symptom control. Additionally, novel drugs such as viloxazine and centanafadine show promise as alternatives with potentially fewer side effects, broadening the spectrum of available therapies. As these new medications become accessible, they may help develop more personalized treatment plans tailored to individual patient needs and potential side effects.

Objective: To investigate the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on motor coordination in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: In this single-site, open-label, naturalistic follow-up study, 157 children (7.6±1.4 years; 139 males) with ADHD were recruited between March 2015 and May 2020 from the Department of Psychiatry, Asan Medical Center, and treated for 12 weeks with methylphenidate (n=48) or atomoxetine (n=109). Children completed the Advanced Test of Attention (ATA), and caregivers completed the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS) questionnaire and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) at baseline and at 12 weeks. Paired t-tests, a mixed-effects model, and linear regression were used to compare treatment groups and assess factors influencing motor coordination changes. Results: Methylphenidate and atomoxetine resulted in significant improvement in DCDQ fine motor/handwriting, general coordination, and total scores over 12 weeks. Fine motor/handwriting had a significant main effect for time (F1=16.64, p<0.001, η2=0.097); however, the interaction effect between group and time was not significant (F1=0.24, p=0.625, η2=0.002). Changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.174, p=0.029) and auditory commission errors of ATA (β=0.191, p=0.022) were significantly associated with changes in fine motor/handwriting. Additionally, changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.177, p=0.034) and rater-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.198, p=0.017) were significant predictors of improvements in general coordination in separate models. Conclusion Methylphenidate and atomoxetine had a positive effect on motor coordination in children with ADHD. Improvement in motor coordination was associated with ADHD symptom improvement.

This review highlights the current and emerging pharmacological treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Stimulants such as methylphenidate are the first-line treatment for improving attention and behavior. Non-stimulants, such as atomoxetine serve as alternative options, particularly for patients with comorbid conditions or those intolerant to stimulants. Emerging treatments, not yet available in Korea, include the methylphenidate prodrug, delayed-release/extended-release methylphenidate, and transdermal dextroamphetamine, that provide innovative delivery systems for sustained symptom control. Additionally, novel drugs such as viloxazine and centanafadine show promise as alternatives with potentially fewer side effects, broadening the spectrum of available therapies. As these new medications become accessible, they may help develop more personalized treatment plans tailored to individual patient needs and potential side effects.

Objective: To investigate the effects of methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatment on motor coordination in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: In this single-site, open-label, naturalistic follow-up study, 157 children (7.6±1.4 years; 139 males) with ADHD were recruited between March 2015 and May 2020 from the Department of Psychiatry, Asan Medical Center, and treated for 12 weeks with methylphenidate (n=48) or atomoxetine (n=109). Children completed the Advanced Test of Attention (ATA), and caregivers completed the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS) questionnaire and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) at baseline and at 12 weeks. Paired t-tests, a mixed-effects model, and linear regression were used to compare treatment groups and assess factors influencing motor coordination changes. Results: Methylphenidate and atomoxetine resulted in significant improvement in DCDQ fine motor/handwriting, general coordination, and total scores over 12 weeks. Fine motor/handwriting had a significant main effect for time (F1=16.64, p<0.001, η2=0.097); however, the interaction effect between group and time was not significant (F1=0.24, p=0.625, η2=0.002). Changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.174, p=0.029) and auditory commission errors of ATA (β=0.191, p=0.022) were significantly associated with changes in fine motor/handwriting. Additionally, changes in parent-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.177, p=0.034) and rater-reported ARS inattention scores (β=-0.198, p=0.017) were significant predictors of improvements in general coordination in separate models. Conclusion Methylphenidate and atomoxetine had a positive effect on motor coordination in children with ADHD. Improvement in motor coordination was associated with ADHD symptom improvement.

Objective: This study compared adaptive functioning measured by the Korean version of Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition (K-VABS-II), in preschool children with developmental disabilities (DD) and those with typical development (TD). We also examined the correlation of K-VABS-II adaptive profiles with developmental and behavioral assessments. Methods: Two hundred preschool children (73 females and 127 males, mean age 54.7±9.1 months) were recruited from special educational centers, community-based daycare centers, and kindergartens. Eighty-one with DD comprising 61 with autism spectrum disorder, 63 with intellectual disability, 12 with language disorder, and 119 with TD were included. Their developmental profiles were measured by the Psychoeducational Profile-Revised (PEP-R), Preschool Receptive-Expressive Language Scale (PRES), K-VABS-II, Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS), and the Korean version of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (K-CARS). The parent completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), and Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC). Results: The K-VABS-II Adaptive Behavior Composite and all domain scores of K-VABS-II differed significantly between children with DD and TD (all p<0.001). In most domains, K-VABS-II had moderate-to-strong correlations with PEP-R, PRES, K-CARS, and SRS. The Maladaptive Behavior Index domain of K-VABS-II had moderate correlations with behavioral assessments, including CBCL and ABC. Conclusion These findings suggest that K-VABS-II is useful in evaluating developmental levels and adaptive and maladaptive behaviors of preschool children with DD. K-VABS-II also had significant correlations with cognitive, language, social, and behavioral assessments.

Objective: This study compared adaptive functioning measured by the Korean version of Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition (K-VABS-II), in preschool children with developmental disabilities (DD) and those with typical development (TD). We also examined the correlation of K-VABS-II adaptive profiles with developmental and behavioral assessments. Methods: Two hundred preschool children (73 females and 127 males, mean age 54.7±9.1 months) were recruited from special educational centers, community-based daycare centers, and kindergartens. Eighty-one with DD comprising 61 with autism spectrum disorder, 63 with intellectual disability, 12 with language disorder, and 119 with TD were included. Their developmental profiles were measured by the Psychoeducational Profile-Revised (PEP-R), Preschool Receptive-Expressive Language Scale (PRES), K-VABS-II, Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS), and the Korean version of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (K-CARS). The parent completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), and Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC). Results: The K-VABS-II Adaptive Behavior Composite and all domain scores of K-VABS-II differed significantly between children with DD and TD (all p<0.001). In most domains, K-VABS-II had moderate-to-strong correlations with PEP-R, PRES, K-CARS, and SRS. The Maladaptive Behavior Index domain of K-VABS-II had moderate correlations with behavioral assessments, including CBCL and ABC. Conclusion These findings suggest that K-VABS-II is useful in evaluating developmental levels and adaptive and maladaptive behaviors of preschool children with DD. K-VABS-II also had significant correlations with cognitive, language, social, and behavioral assessments.