Effects of therapy balls on children diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Four elementary students with ADHD sat on therapy balls instead of chairs.

The class used an alternating-treatments design. Some days the kids had balls, some days chairs.

Researchers measured on-task behavior and schoolwork output each day.

Therapy balls made no difference. Attention stayed the same. Work completion stayed the same.

Kids said the balls were fun, but fun did not turn into learning gains.

Rieth et al. (2022) seemed to get the opposite result. Their computer brain-training helped autistic kids, but only when those kids also had strong ADHD traits. The contradiction fades once you see R’s effective group already had ADHD. Taipalus studied pure ADHD students, so the populations differ.

Klein et al. (2024) and Zheng et al. (2025) extend the hunt for cognitive help. Eye-tracking workouts and short digital memory games gave small gains to children with ADHD or mixed diagnoses. These active trainings, unlike passive ball seating, asked kids to repeatedly practice attention skills.

Adams et al. (2021) used quick classroom movement breaks for students with intellectual disability. Like Taipalus, they saw only tiny academic pay-offs, showing that brief physical tweaks rarely move learning scores on their own.

You can stop buying therapy balls as an ADHD fix. Save the money for evidence-based tools like teacher antecedent strategies or targeted cognitive training. If you still want movement, use it as a break, not a seat.