Report_on_Fish_Oil_Affects_on_Adhd

Abstract The study looked at whether DHA supplements could improve information processing, hyperactivity and conduct behaviour problems. Children without any learning disabilities aged 8 to 10 were given either a fish oil supplement containing DHA fatty acids or a placebo (olive oil). The children were tested before any supplement was given and then tested after 16 weeks by using a matching familiar figures test (MFFT) and a strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ). For each test, results indicated that differences between groups in week 16, when week 0 was used as a confound, was not significant. Only correct responses of the MFFT were significant, but as latency of the responses was not significant, general information processing was not improved. It was discussed that future studies should look at this in children given DHA while breast feeding. It was also discussed that hyperactivity and conduct behaviour should be analysed in either a digit span test or by using different people to fill out the questionnaire. Introduction The study focuses on the subject of whether omega 3 supplements in healthy children’s daily diets could improve their information processing (thus attention) but also reduce conduct behaviour problems and hyperactivity. To do so, supplements in fish oil which contains omega 3 fatty acids or a placebo (olive oil) were given randomly to 401children ranging from the age of 8 to 10. Past studies have looked at the effects of increasing omega 3 fatty acids in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)’s diet could decrease their symptoms. These children are especially interesting to researchers as the symptoms include extreme inattention and/or impulsivity and hyperactivity (Biederman J, 1998). Stevens, Zentall, Deck, Abate, Watkins, Lipp and Burgess, in 1995, found that subjects with ADHD showed lower plasma concentration of essential fatty acids (containing omega 3). However the precise reason for the lower concentration was questioned. This led others to look into the consequences of increasing omega 3 in diets for ADHD children. In 2003, Stevens, Zhang, Peck, Kuczek and Grevstad conducted an experiment by given randomly either an olive oil placebo supplement or a supplement of Poly Unsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFA=which contains DHA and EPA). DHA and EPA, two long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, are found primarily in oily or fatty fish. DHA in particular is thought to be an important component of brain cell membranes as it affects membrane fluidity but also affects the neuronal and retinal development (Kurlak, Stephenson, 1999).Stevens et al found in this experiment that the supplementation in PUFA did not improve ADHD symptoms but did improve “oppositional defiant behaviour”. However a year earlier, Richardson found that HUFA (unsaturated fatty acids) reduced symptoms in 8 to 12 year old children with ADHD of the disorder and improved behavioural problems. For 12 weeks these children were given either a placebo or a HUFA supplementation for 12 weeks and results of the improvement were significant (Richardson 2002). In 2008, Sinn, Bryana and Wilson looked at the cognitive effects of PUFA on ADHD children. The 7 to 12 year olds were given either the placebo or PUFA with extra vitamins/ minerals for 15 weeks. After the 15 weeks all children were then given the PUFA supplements (with vitamins). Results of this experiment showed that after 15 weeks and after 30 weeks children given the PUFA showed improvements in attention and cognitive performances in inattention /hyperactivity and impulsivity. The present study looked at whether these affects could be found in children without ADHD. Children were recruited from 18 primary schools in Newport, Gwent. Children ranged from 8 to 10 years of age and did not have any learning disability such as ADHD and autism. For 15 weeks, the children were given either a fish oil capsule containing DHA supplements (chosen for the importance known to brain functioning) or an olive oil placebo supplement. Tests were administered before and after the 15 weeks, on the children ‘s attention using the Matching familiar figures test (MFFT) and the children’s hyperactivity and conduct behaviour, measured by parents rating of the child on the Strength and difficulty scale questionnaire. The independent variables of the study are the MFFT correct scores and latency scores, the hyperactivity scores and the conduct behaviour scores on the SDQ. The independent variable is which group (placebo/fish oil group) the children belonged to. As scores from each group might differ just by chance in the week before supplements were given, week 0 of each dependent variable was used as a confound variable. It was hypothesized that the fish oil supplement given daily would improve attention. It was also hypothesized that hyperactivity and conduct behaviours would decrease in children taking the fish oil supplements. Methods Design Four, in between design ANCOVAs, were used to test the data: For each test the independent variable was whether the children were given the fish oil supplement or the placebo (olive oil supplement). The first ANCOVA tested the children‘s correct responses in an attention test called Matching familiar faces test (MFFT). The dependent variable was thus MFFT correct responses in week 16. The second ANCOVA‘s dependent variable was the latency (time taken to answer each response) for each response of the MFFT in week 16. The third ANCOVA tested looked at hyperactivity. Scores of the SDQ questionnaire on hyperactivity were used as the dependent variable. Finally the dependent variable for the last ANCOVA was the scores of the SDQ questionnaire on conduct behaviour given in week 16. As the two groups of participants might differ greatly in week 0 on any measure due to the randomisation, a confound variable was used for each ANCOVA: each dependent variable at week 0. Participants A total of 401 children (188 boys and 213), were recruited for the experiment in 18 typical primary school in Newport, Gwent. The children were aged from 8 to 10 years old. Children did not have any learning disabilities such as ADHD or Autism and did not have a low IQ. 177 participants dropped out from the matching familiar figures test. And 304 parents did not fill out the Strengths and difficulties questionnaire. This means that 204 participants’ scores for the MFFT and 97 participant’s scores for the SDQ were used to analyse the study. Apparatus The supplements given were chewable fish oil capsules (DHA 200mg, EPA 28mg) olive oil that both contained sweeteners and colours to distract the children from the fishy aroma and flavour. These capsules were provided by Seven Seas Ltd. The test used to measure the participant’s attention was a Matching Familiar Figures Test (Kagan, 1964). A paper version of the MFFT was used where the page was to be flipped over to see the answer. A step watch was used to measure how long each child‘s responses took. To measure both conduct behaviour problems and hyperactivity in children a questionnaire was given to the children’s parents to fill out. The questionnaire called “strengths and difficulty scale questionnaire” (Goodman, 1997) contained 5 questions on 5 different subscales: children’s emotional problems, conduct problems, hyperactivity/ inattention, peer relationship problems and pro-social behaviours. Procedure Before any supplements were given, 401children were tested on the Matching Familiar Figures Test at week 0 in a room made available by each school. The children were tested by research assistants. Parents were mailed the strengths and difficulty scale questionnaire and were then asked to return the completed questionnaire directly to the researchers. Children were then randomly assigned to either the fish oil capsule or the placebo. Two capsules were given every day for 16 weeks by the school teaching staff and on weekends by the children‘s parents. At week 16 the same procedure of measuring the MFFT was undertaken at each child’s school. Parents were mailed again the same questionnaire. Data was then collected into an SPSS file for data analysis. Results Mean scores for MFFT correct/MFFT latency/ hyperactivity/conduct behaviour and their standard deviations are shown in table 1 for the fish oil and placebo group: Table1: Mean and standard deviations for each score (MFFT scores, hyperactivity and conduct) in both groups MFFT Correct MFFT latency Hyperactivity scores Conduct problem scores Fish oil Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 6.49 2.19 11.39 5.01 3.47 0.23 1.60 0.18 Placebo Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 5.77 2.25 10.62 6.13 3.81 0.21 1.71 0.17 The means shown above in table 1 suggest that fish oil did affect the correct responses in the attention/ information processing task, and the speed at which answers were given as mean scores for both MFFT correct responses and MFFT latency were higher in the fish oil group.(6.49>5.77= MFFT correct; 11.39>10.62= MFFT latency). However the fish oil group seems to have had lower scores on average compared to the placebo group on the SDQ scores for both hyperactivity and conduct behaviour (Hyperactivity= 3.47