Search

ObjectiveComorbid post-traumatic stress disorder in patients with anorexia nervosa may negatively affect the course of anorexia nervosa treatment, which is already challenging. There are currently no guidelines or recommendations on concurrent treatment approaches for both anorexia nervosa and post-traumatic stress disorder. This systematic scoping review aims to explore the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of psychological trauma-focused treatment concurrently offered to underweight patients receiving anorexia nervosa treatment.MethodA multi-step literature search, according to an a priori protocol was performed. Databases PubMed, Embase, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central were searched up to September 19th 2022, and the search was rerun June 19th 2023. For quality assessment, Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions tool was used.ResultsThe extensive search yielded 1769 reports, out of which only three observational pilot studies, both English and German, published between 2004 and 2022, could be included. The included studies reported on a total of 13 female participants between 16 and 58 years old, with anorexia nervosa or otherwise specified feeding or eating disorder, baseline BMI ranging between 14.6 and 16.5, who received concurrent anorexia and post-traumatic stress disorder treatment. In all participants, the emotional and cognitive functioning was sufficient to process the offered trauma-focused interventions, despite their significantly low body weight.DiscussionThe findings of this review identify a dearth of treatment research on knowledge of concurrent trauma-focused treatments for patients with anorexia nervosa. Refraining patients with anorexia nervosa from trauma-focused treatment may not be warranted.

Binge-eating disorder (BED) is a psychiatric disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of eating a large amount of food in a discrete period of time while experiencing a loss of control. Cognitive behavioral therapy-enhanced (CBT-E) is a recommended treatment for binge-eating disorder and is typically offered through 20 sessions. Although binge-eating disorder is highly responsive to CBT-E, the cost of treating these patients is high. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the efficacy of low-intensity and low-cost treatments for binge-eating disorder that can be offered as a first line of treatment and be widely disseminated. The proposed noninferiority randomized controlled trial aims to determine the efficacy of web-based guided self-help CBT-E compared to treatment-as-usual CBT-E. Guided self-help will be based on a self-help program to stop binge eating, will be shorter in duration and lower intensity, and will require fewer therapist hours. Patients with binge-eating disorder (N = 180) will be randomly assigned to receive guided self-help or treatment-as-usual. Assessments will take place at baseline, mid-treatment, at the end of treatment, and at 20- and 40-weeks post-treatment. Treatment efficacy will be measured by examining the reduction in binge-eating days in the previous 28 days between baseline and the end of treatment between groups, with a noninferiority margin (Δ) of 1 binge-eating day. Secondary outcomes will include full remission, body shape dissatisfaction, therapeutic alliance, clinical impairment, health-related quality of life, attrition, and an economic evaluation to assess cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. The moderators examined will be baseline scores, demographic variables, and body mass index. It is expected that guided self-help is noninferior in efficacy compared to treatment-as-usual. The proposed study will be the first to directly compare the efficacy and economically evaluate a low-intensity and low-cost binge-eating disorder treatment compared to treatment-as-usual. If guided self-help is noninferior to treatment-as-usual in efficacy, it can be widely disseminated and used as a first line of treatment for patients with binge-eating disorder. The Dutch trial register number is R21.016. The study has been approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committees United on May 25th, 2021, case number NL76368.100.21.

BackgroundThe highly recurrent nature of Major Depressive Disorder is a major contributor to disability and health care costs. Several studies indicate that recurrence may be prevented with Preventive Cognitive Therapy (PCT). This study is the first to perform an economic evaluation of PCT in comparison with care as usual for recurrently depressed patients who experienced two or more depressive episodes and remitted after receiving Cognitive Behavioural Therapy.MethodsAn economic evaluation from the societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized trial (N = 214). Health-related quality of life (QALYs), depression-free days, health care utilization, and productivity losses were measured between randomization and 15 months follow-up. The costs were indexed to the reference year 2014.ResultsQALY gains did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.69). Depression-free days were higher after PCT (p = 0.02). Societal costs of PCT were 10,417 euro and for care as usual 9,545 euro per person. We found a 47% likelihood that PCT led to additional QALYs at higher costs, and there was a 26% likelihood that PCT led to fewer QALYs at higher costs. When depression-free days was used as an outcome, we found PCT had a 72% likelihood of leading to more depression-free days at higher costs than care as usual and a 27% likelihood of leading to more depression-free days at lower societal costs.LimitationsThe 15-month follow-up might be too short to draw long-term conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of the PCT. The data collected for this study is part of an RCT to examine the effectiveness of adding PCT to care as usual. Therefore, the study was powered primarily to detect an effect in time to relapse/recurrences.ConclusionThe economic evaluation is slightly in favour of the PCT condition when depression-free days is used as an outcome. PCT is not cost-effective given the high costs per additional QALYs from the societal perspective when QALYs are the effect measure.Clinical trial registrationhttps://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en, identifier NL2482.

BackgroundOwing to the gap between treatment supply and demand, there are long waiting periods for patients with binge eating disorder, and there is an urgent need to increase their access to specialized treatment. Guided self-help cognitive behavioral therapy–enhanced (CBT-E) may have great advantages for patients if its efficacy can be established. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of guided self-help CBT-E compared with that of a delayed-treatment control condition. MethodsA single-blind 2-arm randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate guided self-help CBT-E according to an intention-to-treat analysis. A total of 180 patients were randomly assigned to guided self-help CBT-E (n=90, 50%) or the delayed-treatment control condition (n=90, 50%) for which guided self-help CBT-E was provided after the initial 12-week delay. The primary outcome was reduction in binges. The secondary outcome was full recovery at the end of treatment, as measured using the Eating Disorder Examination during the last 4 weeks of treatment. A linear mixed model analysis was performed to compare treatment outcomes at the end of treatment. A second linear mixed model analysis was performed to measure between- and within-group effects for up to 24 weeks of follow-up. The Eating Disorder Examination–Questionnaire and clinical impairment assessment were conducted before and after treatment and during follow-up. In addition, dropout rates were assessed in both conditions. ResultsDuring the last 4 weeks of treatment, objective binges reduced from an average of 19 (SD 16) to 3 (SD 5) binges, and 40% (36/90) showed full recovery in the guided self-help CBT-E group. Between-group effect size (Cohen d) was 1.0 for objective binges. At follow-up, after both groups received treatment, there was no longer a difference between the groups. Of the 180 participants, 142 (78.9%) completed treatment. The overall treatment dropout appeared to be associated with gender, level of education, and number of objective binges at baseline but not with treatment condition. ConclusionsThis is the first study to investigate the efficacy of guided self-help CBT-E. Guided self-help CBT-E appeared to be an efficacious treatment. This study’s findings underscore the international guidelines recommending this type of treatment for binge eating disorder. Trial RegistrationNetherlands Trial Registry (NTR) NL7994; https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NL7994 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.1186/s12888-020-02604-1

Abstract Background For anorexia nervosa, firm evidence of the superiority of specialized psychological treatments is limited and economic evaluations of such treatments in real world settings are scarce. This consecutive cohort study examined differential (cost-)effectiveness for adult inpatients and outpatients with anorexia nervosa, after implementing cognitive behavioral therapy-enhanced (CBT-E) throughout a routine setting. Methods Differences in remission, weight regain and direct eating disorder treatment costs were examined between one cohort (N = 75) receiving treatment-as-usual (TAU) between 2012–2014, and the other (N = 88) CBT-E between 2015–2017. The economic evaluation was performed from a health care perspective with a one-year time horizon, using EDE global score 50% probability of cost-effectiveness) assuming a WTP of €51,081 or more for each additional remission, On remission, no difference was found with 9.3% remission during TAU and 14.6% during CBT-E (p = .304). Weight regain was higher during CBT-E (EMD = 1.33 kg/m2, SE = .29, 95% CI [0.76–1.9], p

Abstract Background Binge eating disorder is characterized by recurrent episodes of binge eating accompanied by a sense of lack of control. Of the different treatments available, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy-Enhanced and guided self-help treatment are recommended. As online treatment offers several additional advantages, we have developed a CBT-Enhanced online guided self-help intervention. The aim of this study is to determine whether this intervention reduces eating disorder pathology and increases the amount of binge free days in adults classified with binge eating disorder or other specified feeding or eating disorder- binge eating disorder, compared to an untreated waiting list condition. The experimental condition is hypothesized to be superior to the waiting list condition. Methods The efficacy of an online guided self-help intervention for binge eating disorder will be assessed by conducting a randomized controlled trial. The trial will target adult individuals classified with binge eating disorder or other specified feeding or eating disorder- binge eating disorder with a body mass index between 19.5 and 40, referred to an eating disorder treatment center. Dual arm allotment will be performed in a 1:1 ratio stratified for BMI above or below 30. Randomization will be blinded to the online intervention (n = 90), or to the control waiting list condition (n = 90). Assessors will be blinded and assessments will be administered at baseline, week 5, at end-of-treatment, and at 12 and 24 weeks follow-up. Primary outcome will be eating disorder pathology, operationalized as number of days on which binge eating occurred between the two conditions during the period of the intervention. Secondary outcome measures will be differences in other eating disorder pathology, clinical impairment and in quality of life, while therapeutic alliance, demographic characteristics and followed treatment module will serve as effect moderators. Several types of costs will be assessed. Discussion This paper presents an online guided self-help Cognitive Behavioral Therapy- Enhanced study protocol for individuals classified with binge eating disorder or other specified feeding or eating disorder. Efficacy will be examined through a Randomized Controlled Trial. Trial registration The study protocol is registered with the Netherlands Trial Registry NTR ( NTR 7994 ) since 6 September 2019.

OBJECTIVE:Remitted patients with a history of several previous major depressive episodes have a higher risk of relapse/recurrence than patients with fewer previous episodes, and the probability of another episode increases progressively with each successive episode. This study examines the association between the number of previous episodes and modifiable vulnerability factors in remitted patients with recurrent depression. METHODS:Patients with recurrent depression (DSM-IV-diagnosed) who were in remission (N = 214) were recruited between September 2011 and July 2016. The association was examined between the number of previous episodes and the following factors: i.e. interpersonal functioning, daily stress, sense of mastery, coping and dysfunctional beliefs. RESULTS:A history of more previous episodes was associated with higher levels of interpersonal problems (P < .001), daily stress (P = .04) and a lower sense of mastery (P = .05). Interpersonal problems were most strongly associated with more previous episodes in a Generalized Linear Regression model. In the domain of interpersonal problems, the subscales that showed the strongest relationship were domineering/controlling, vindictive/self-centred, socially inhibited and self-sacrificing. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with a history of more depressive episodes reported higher levels of interpersonal problems, daily stress and a lower sense of mastery. Future studies should examine these factors in a longitudinal cohort and look at whether the effect of interventions to prevent relapse can be explained by targeting these psychological factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register: 2599.