Methylphenidate vs. resperidone in treatment of methamphetamine dependence: A clinical trial
Open accessAbstract
Background and aims Currently, there is no widely accepted evidence-based pharmacotherapy regime for the treatment of psychostimulant dependence. Yet, different pharmacological approaches have been tried in the treatment of MA addiction. The present study was conducted to compare efficiency of methylphenidate which is relatively easily accessible in our country, with resperidone for this purpose. Methods Eighty-six patients with MA dependence according to criteria defined by DSM IV-TR were divided into two groups. Patients in group R were given oral resperidone 1 mg daily for 1 week; then 2 mg daily in a divided dose for 3 weeks. Patients in group M were given oral methylphenidate 10 mg daily for 2 weeks, 7.5 mg daily for 1 week, then 5 mg daily for 1 week. They were evaluated for drug craving, psychological, neurologic and somatic symptoms at the start and end of the study. Findings Both drugs were useful for lowering drug craving in patients; however resperidone was more effective (6.31 ± 8.31 vs.19.6 ± 12.45 cravings per week, respectively). The effects of resperidone were more notable in lowering frequency and intensity of psychiatric, neurologic, cardiac and somatic symptoms of the patients after discontinuation of MA abuse; however methylphenidate was effective too; though with a lower potency. Conclusion The present study confirmed that both methylphenidate and resperidone can successfully be used for treatment of MA dependence, in order to reduce drug craving and psyc…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Acute methamphetamine psychosis is associated with particularly high risk for harm.
“Acute methamphetamine psychosis is associated with particularly high risk for harm.247”
From The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [247]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The ASAM/AAAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Stimulant Use Disorder
(2024) · Journal of Addiction Medicine · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000001299 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
- Authors
- Solhi, H., Jamilian, H. R., Kazemifar, A. M., Javaheri, J., & Rasti Barzaki, A.
- Affiliations
- Arak University of Medical Sciences (IR)
- Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (IR)
- Venue
- Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal
- Published
- 2014-07
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 191-194
- ISSN
- 1319-0164 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4099559
- OpenAlex
- W2047160838
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 0.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
- Keywords
- methamphetamine dependence, methylphenidate, stimulant use disorder, pharmacotherapy, drug craving, psychiatric symptoms, neurological symptoms, somatic symptoms, cardiac symptoms
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review