EDIFY (Eating Disorders: Delineating Illness and Recovery Trajectories to Inform Personalised Prevention and Early Intervention in Young People): project outline

Early intervention for eating disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Research on early intervention for eating disorders has started to gain traction and examples of this in practice are increasing. This review summarizes findings over the past 3 years, focusing on the clinical effectiveness of early intervention in practice and the barriers and facilitators to its implementation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent developments in early intervention for eating disorders can be divided into three broad themes: research that has examined the efficacy of early intervention pathways in practice, research that has informed understanding of the target patient groups of early intervention (via clinical staging models, e.g.), and research that has suggested new ways to progress early intervention, towards becoming a standard part of best practice care.

SUMMARY

Early intervention pathways have shown promising clinical outcomes and are viewed positively by patients, clinicians and other stakeholders. However, more robust trials of their efficacy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are needed. Additionally, barriers to early intervention have been identified (e.g. delayed help-seeking); research must now develop and evaluate strategies to address these. Finally, the early intervention models in practice are underpinned partly by clinical staging models for eating disorders, which require further development, especially for eating disorders other than anorexia nervosa.

Barriers and facilitators to ethical co-production with Autistic people with an eating disorder

BACKGROUND

Co-production is the collaboration between researchers and the lived experience community in designing, conducting and sharing research. The importance of co-production is increasingly advocated in both the autism and eating disorder fields. Despite this, there remains a lack of clarity at how to define, apply and conduct ethical co-production. Understanding common challenges and what we can do to overcome these challenges are integral to ensuring ethical and meaningful research with Autistic people with an eating disorder. The current study therefore explored: What are the barriers and facilitators to ethical co-production with Autistic people with an ED?

METHODS

Five workshops were conducted with 30 collaborators exploring barriers and facilitators to ethical co-production. Synchronous (online workshops) and asynchronous (offline discussion forum) data was analysed using thematic analysis. Themes were co-produced by a neurotypical and Autistic researcher with lived/living experience of an eating disorder.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified that explored barriers to ethical co-production: unequal partnerships, the inaccessibility of research, excluded by diagnoses and communication differences. Three themes were identified with regards to facilitators of ethical co-production: shared power (with sub-themes relationships, not roles and creative compensation), clarity and transparency and autism-affirming approaches.

DISCUSSION

Conducting ethical co-production with Autistic people with eating disorders has the potential to generate meaningful research that can be translated into improving the lives of the Autistic and eating disorder community. To achieve this, co-production teams should strive towards shared power and long-term relationships, adapting for communication differences and preferences and operating firmly within an autism-affirming framework. It is hoped that study findings will inspire collaboration, discussion and novel, translatable research.

Characterising illness stages and recovery trajectories of eating disorders in young people via remote measurement technology (STORY): a multi-centre prospective cohort study protocol

BACKGROUND

Eating disorders (EDs) are serious, often chronic, conditions associated with pronounced morbidity, mortality, and dysfunction increasingly affecting young people worldwide. Illness progression, stages and recovery trajectories of EDs are still poorly characterised. The STORY study dynamically and longitudinally assesses young people with different EDs (restricting; bingeing/bulimic presentations) and illness durations (earlier; later stages) compared to healthy controls. Remote measurement technology (RMT) with active and passive sensing is used to advance understanding of the heterogeneity of earlier and more progressed clinical presentations and predictors of recovery or relapse.

METHODS

STORY follows 720 young people aged 16-25 with EDs and 120 healthy controls for 12 months. Online self-report questionnaires regularly assess ED symptoms, psychiatric comorbidities, quality of life, and socioeconomic environment. Additional ongoing monitoring using multi-parametric RMT via smartphones and wearable smart rings ('Ōura ring') unobtrusively measures individuals' daily behaviour and physiology (e.g., Bluetooth connections, sleep, autonomic arousal). A subgroup of participants completes additional in-person cognitive and neuroimaging assessments at study-baseline and after 12 months.

DISCUSSION

By leveraging these large-scale longitudinal data from participants across ED diagnoses and illness durations, the STORY study seeks to elucidate potential biopsychosocial predictors of outcome, their interplay with developmental and socioemotional changes, and barriers and facilitators of recovery. STORY holds the promise of providing actionable findings that can be translated into clinical practice by informing the development of both early intervention and personalised treatment that is tailored to illness stage and individual circumstances, ultimately disrupting the long-term burden of EDs on individuals and their families.

"Early intervention isn't an option, it's a necessity": learning from implementation facilitators and challenges from the rapid scaling of an early intervention eating disorders programme in England

Introduction

The First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service has shown promising outcomes for young people with an eating disorder, leading to national scaling and implementation across England. Between 2020 and 2023, the national implementation of FREED was supported by the Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs), which are publicly funded organisations with the mission to spread innovations at scale and pace. This study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of AHSN programme leads on the national roll-out of FREED and the perceived sustainability of the model.

Methods and results

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 programme leads across the AHSNs with direct experience supporting the national implementation of FREED. Thematic analysis was adopted using a critical realist approach. Initial sub-themes were inductively generated and then organised under seven larger themes representing the domains of the Non-adoption, Abandonment, and Challenges to Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability (NASSS) framework. Each sub-theme was classified as a facilitator and/or barrier and then each larger theme/domain was assessed for its complexity (simple, complicated, complex). Data analysis revealed 28 sub-themes, 10 identified as facilitators, 13 as barriers, and five as both. Two domains were classed as simple, three as complicated, and two as complex. Sub-themes ranged from illness-related complexities to organisational pressures. Key facilitators included a high-value proposition for FREED and a supportive network. Key barriers included staffing issues and illness-related factors that challenge early intervention.

Discussion

Participants described broad support for FREED but desired sustained investment for continued provision and improving implementation fidelity. Future development areas raised by participants included enlarging the evidence base for early intervention, increasing associated training opportunities, and widening the reach of FREED. Results offer learning for early intervention in eating disorders and the scaling of new health initiatives.