To develop a European guideline on pharmacologic treatment of Tourette syndrome (TS) the available literature was thoroughly screened and extensively discussed by a working group of the European Society for the Study of Tourette syndrome (ESSTS). Although there are many more studies on pharmacotherapy of TS than on behavioral treatment options, only a limited number of studies meets rigorous quality criteria. Therefore, we have devised a two-stage approach. First, we present the highest level of evidence by reporting the findings of existing Cochrane reviews in this field. Subsequently, we provide the first comprehensive overview of all reports on pharmacological treatment options for TS through a MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE search for all studies that document the effect of pharmacological treatment of TS and other tic disorders between 1970 and November 2010. We present a summary of the current consensus on pharmacological treatment options for TS in Europe to guide the clinician in daily practice. This summary is, however, rather a status quo of a clinically helpful but merely low evidence guideline, mainly driven by expert experience and opinion, since rigorous experimental studies are scarce.

In 2011, the European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome (ESSTS) published the first European guidelines for Tourette Syndrome (TS). We now present an update of the part on pharmacological treatment, based on a review of new literature with special attention to other evidence-based guidelines, meta-analyses, and randomized double-blinded studies. Moreover, our revision took into consideration results of a recent survey on treatment preferences conducted among ESSTS experts. The first preference should be given to psychoeducation and to behavioral approaches, as it strengthens the patients’ self-regulatory control and thus his/her autonomy. Because behavioral approaches are not effective, available, or feasible in all patients, in a substantial number of patients pharmacological treatment is indicated, alone or in combination with behavioral therapy. The largest amount of evidence supports the use of dopamine blocking agents, preferably aripiprazole because of a more favorable profile of adverse events than first- and second-generation antipsychotics. Other agents that can be considered include tiapride, risperidone, and especially in case of co-existing attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), clonidine and guanfacine. This view is supported by the results of our survey on medication preference among members of ESSTS, in which aripiprazole was indicated as the drug of first choice both in children and adults. In treatment resistant cases, treatment with agents with either a limited evidence base or risk of extrapyramidal adverse effects might be considered, including pimozide, haloperidol, topiramate, cannabis-based agents, and botulinum toxin injections. Overall, treatment of TS should be individualized, and decisions based on the patient’s needs and preferences, presence of co-existing conditions, latest scientific findings as well as on the physician’s preferences, experience, and local regulatory requirements.

To cite this article:Schmitt J, Buske‐Kirschbaum A, Roessner V. Is atopic disease a risk factor for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder? A systematic review.Allergy2010;65: 1506–1524. The increase in prevalence and burden of atopic diseases, i.e. eczema, rhinitis, and asthma over the past decades was paralleled by a worldwide increase in attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnoses. We systematically reviewed epidemiologic studies investigating the relationship between atopic diseases and ADHD. Electronic literature search in PubMed and PsycINFO (until 02/2010) supplemented by handsearch yielded 20 relevant studies totaling 170 175 individuals. Relevant data were abstracted independently by two reviewers. Six studies consistently reported a positive association between eczema and ADHD with one study suggesting effect modification by sleeping problems. Twelve studies consistently found a positive association between asthma and ADHD, which, however, appeared to be at least partly explained (confounded) by concurrent or previous eczema. Rhinitis and serum‐IgE level were not related to ADHD symptomatology. We conclude that not atopic disease in general, but rather that eczema appears to be independently related to ADHD. Conclusions about temporality and whether the observed association constitutes a causal relationship are impossible, as most studies were cross‐sectional (n = 14; 70%) or case–control studies without incident exposure measurement (n = 5; 25%). Another methodological concern is that the criteria to define atopic disease and ADHD were inadequate in most studies. A failure to adjust for confounders in the majority of studies was an additional limitation so that meta‐analysis was not indicated. Future interdisciplinary high‐quality prospective research is needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying the relationship between eczema and ADHD and to eventually establish targeted preventive and treatment strategies.

Part II of the European clinical guidelines for Tourette syndrome and other tic disorders (ECAP journal, 2011) provides updated information and recommendations for psychological interventions for individuals with tic disorders, created by a working group of the European Society for the Study of Tourette Syndrome (ESSTS). A systematic literature search was conducted to obtain original studies of psychological interventions for tic disorders, published since the initial European clinical guidelines were issued. Relevant studies were identified using computerized searches of the MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for the years 2011–2019 and a manual search for the years 2019–2021. Based on clinical consensus, psychoeducation is recommended as an initial intervention regardless of symptom severity. According to a systematic literature search, most evidence was found for Habit Reversal Training (HRT), primarily the expanded package Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics (CBIT). Evidence was also found for Exposure and Response Prevention (ERP), but to a lesser degree of certainty than HRT/CBIT due to fewer studies. Currently, cognitive interventions and third-wave interventions are not recommended as stand-alone treatments for tic disorders. Several novel treatment delivery formats are currently being evaluated, of which videoconference delivery of HRT/CBIT has the most evidence to date. To summarize, when psychoeducation alone is insufficient, both HRT/CBIT and ERP are recommended as first-line interventions for tic disorders. As part of the development of the clinical guidelines, a survey is reported from ESSTS members and other tic disorder experts on preference, use and availability of psychological interventions for tic disorders.