Blind versus open weighing from an eating disorder patient perspective

General Psychiatric Management for Adolescents With Borderline Personality Disorder and Eating Disorders

Borderline personality disorder and eating disorders frequently co-occur among youths. These disorders emerge in adolescence, during the critical developmental period of building an independent sense of self and the capacity to relate to one's community. Because of core differences in the development and psychopathology of borderline personality disorder and eating disorders, adjustments are required when treating these disorders when they co-occur. Few established treatment approaches can address these disorders simultaneously. Evidence-based psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder, such as dialectical behavior therapy and mentalization-based treatment, have been adapted to accommodate the shared vulnerabilities and features of the two disorders. However, these approaches are specialized, intensive, and lengthy and are therefore poorly suited to implementation in general psychiatric or primary health care, where most frontline mental health care is provided. Generalist approaches can fill this public health gap, guiding nonspecialists in structuring informed clinical management for these impairing and sometimes fatal disorders. In this overview, the authors describe the adjustment of good (or general) psychiatric management (GPM) for adolescents with borderline personality disorder to incorporate the prevailing best practices for eating disorder treatment. The adjusted treatment relies on interventions most clinicians already use (diagnostic disclosure, psychoeducation, focusing on life outside treatment, managing patients' self-destructive behaviors, and conservative psychopharmacology with active management of comorbid conditions). Limitations of the adjusted treatment, as well as guidelines for referring patients to specialized and general medical treatments and for returning them to primary generalist psychiatric care, are discussed.

Updates in the treatment of Eating Disorders in 2022: a year in review in Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention

A broad array of important and diverse studies surrounding the treatment of eating disorders were published in Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention in 2022. Novel interventions such as neurosurgical and neuromodulatory treatments were discussed, as evidence continues to mount around their potential utility in treating eating disorders, in particular namely anorexia nervosa. Important pragmatic and theoretical developments around feeding and refeeding approaches emerged, and are also discussed. In this review, we carefully review evidence alluding to the potential efficacy of exercise in partially ameliorating binge eating disorder symptomatology, while examining broader evidence underscoring the importance of therapeutically ameliorating compulsive exercise in anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. In addition, we overview evidence relating to the risk and sequelae associated with premature discharge from intensive eating disorder treatment, as well as the efficacy of CBT versus group therapy-based maintenance treatments. Finally, important developments around the use of open versus blind weighing in treatment are assessed. Overall, the articles published in Eating Disorders: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention in 2022 evidence the promise of treatment advances in the field and requires further work to address the development of efficacious treatments to achieve greater outcomes for those with eating disorders.

Evaluating an implementation model of evidence-based therapy for eating disorders in non-specialist regional mental health settings

BACKGROUND

Many people with eating disorders (EDs) either do not access treatment, access it well after symptoms first start, or drop out of treatment. This study evaluated ways to improve early access to evidence-based interventions for those with EDs in a non-specialist community setting.

METHODS

In an Australian regional community, links were formed between general medical practitioners and treatment providers (psychologists, mental health social workers and dietitians), who received ongoing training, feedback and support. Service users had access to 20-40 subsidised treatment sessions. Data were collected from 143 patients over 18 months. Our outcomes are reported according to the RE-AIM implementation framework: Reach (we measured uptake and treatment completion); Effectiveness (impact on disordered eating cognitions, body mass index, remission, and moderators of effectiveness including illness duration, previous treatment, presence of comorbidities, presence of a normative level of disordered eating, presence of any ED behaviours, weighing in treatment, multidisciplinary case conferencing, number of dietetic sessions); Adoption (drop-out and predictors); Implementation (barriers encountered); Maintenance (subsequent activity designed to embed new practices).

RESULTS

Treatment was completed by 71%; significant large decreases in eating disorder cognitions were achieved; remission was obtained by 37% (intent-to-treat). Treatment completion was predicted by lower baseline levels of disordered eating, uptake of ≥ 3 dietetic sessions, and ≥ 2 team case conferences. Greater improvement over time was predicted by regular case conferencing and in-session weighing.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of this model in a regional community setting produced completion rates and outcomes comparable to those found in specialist clinical trials of ED treatments. Service providers identified care coordination as the most important factor to connect users to services and help navigate barriers to ongoing treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This research was an invited evaluation of a project implemented by the Australian Department of Health. The project did not introduce any new clinical practice but sought to improve access to evidence-based multidisciplinary treatment for people with EDs by removing four known systemic barriers: securing an accurate diagnosis, availability of multidisciplinary treatment, cost of treatment, and intensity of treatment. As such, the project did not require trial registration. Notwithstanding, this evaluation obtained ethics approval (Bellberry Human Research Ethics Committee, Application No: 2018-09-728-FR-1).

The impact of open versus closed weighing on rate of weight gain and length of stay among inpatients with anorexia nervosa

Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a serious illness associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Few data exist to guide practice regarding sharing daily weight information (open weighing) or withholding it (closed weighing) from patients. We investigated the effect of open versus closed weighing on weight-related outcomes among inpatients with AN. Data were collected during a 4-month period when 43 patients were not told their daily weight, and a consecutive 4-month period when 41 patients were told their weights during rounds. There was no significant difference in mean overall weight change (3.6 ± 2.7 kg vs. 3.5 ± 2.5 kg), hospital duration (14.3 ± 10.0 vs. 14.2 ± 7.6 days), or rate of weight gain (0.26 ± 0.11 vs. 0.25 ± 0.13 kg) between groups. It is possible that one weighing procedure may not be preferable with respect to certain clinical outcomes for inpatients with AN, suggesting there may be multiple ways to navigate the discussion of weight progress in weight restoration programs.

Patient perceptions of blind and open weighing in treatment for eating disorders

Little is known about patients' perceptions toward open and blind weighing for eating disorders. Upon admission to a partial hospitalization program, 35 child/adolescent patients, 55 adult patients, and 36 parents of child/adolescent patients completed questionnaires assessing attitudes toward open and blind weighing. Participants perceived blind weighing as more effective in the short term. No differences emerged on measures assessing preference, credibility, or long-term effectiveness. Relative to adults, parents preferred blind weighing, and child/adolescents perceived blind weighing as more credible. On a forced-choice question, a majority of adults, about half of children/adolescents, and a minority of parents preferred open weighing over blind weighing. There was a positive association between past treatment experience and current attitudes about weighing. Results suggest that individuals enter treatment with variable attitudes about weighing procedures for eating disorders, and may develop more favorable attitudes toward the practice they receive in treatment.

The psychological effects of blind and open weighing in women with a high drive for thinness: A mixed method inquiry

Regular weighing is a routine component of public health interventions but concerns have been raised about possible negative psychological consequences. Blind weighing is an alternative form of weighing that is commonly used in clinical contexts, and that is thought to decrease weighing anxiety and engagement with disordered eating behaviours. In this study, normal weight female participants who indicated a high drive for thinness (N = 53) were randomly assigned to receive bi-weekly open or blind weighing for three weeks. Participants who were open weighed felt increasingly anxious over time, whereas participants who were blind weighed felt less anxious. Both groups experienced increased weight preoccupation and disordered eating behaviours on weighing days compared to non-weighing days. Analyses of participants' qualitative responses further indicated that open weighed participants experienced increased urges to engage in weight-controlling behaviours throughout the experiment whereas blind weighed participants reported reduced concern with weight. Findings suggest that blind weighing may be a safer approach to weight monitoring, even though weighing in both forms can have a (transient) negative effect. Future research should evaluate whether the current findings are generalisable for other subgroups of the population.