Barbara Schlup1, Andrea H Meyer, Simone Munsch. 1. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare treatment outcomes of a cognitive-behavioral long-term (CBT-L) and short-term (CBT-S) treatment for binge eating disorder (BED) in a non-randomized comparison and to identify moderators of treatment outcome. METHODS: 76 female patients with BED participated in the study: 40 in CBT-L and 36 in CBT-S. Outcome values were compared at the end of the active treatment phase (16 sessions for CBT-L, 8 sessions for CBT-S) and at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Both treatments produced significant reductions in binge eating. At the end of active treatment, but not at the end of follow-up, effects of primary outcomes (e.g. remission from binge eating, EDE shape concern) were better for CBT-L than for CBT-S. Dropout rates were significantly higher in CBT-L (35%) than in CBT-S (14%). Moderator analyses revealed that treatment efficacy for rapid responders and individuals exhibiting high scores on the mixed dietary negative affect subtype differed between the CBT-L and CBT-S with respect to objective binges, restraint eating and eating concern. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that CBT in general represents an effective treatment for BED, but that subgroups of patients might profit more from a prolonged treatment. Short, less-intensive CBT treatments could nevertheless be a viable option in the treatment of BED.
BACKGROUND: To compare treatment outcomes of a cognitive-behavioral long-term (CBT-L) and short-term (CBT-S) treatment for binge eating disorder (BED) in a non-randomized comparison and to identify moderators of treatment outcome. METHODS: 76 female patients with BED participated in the study: 40 in CBT-L and 36 in CBT-S. Outcome values were compared at the end of the active treatment phase (16 sessions for CBT-L, 8 sessions for CBT-S) and at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Both treatments produced significant reductions in binge eating. At the end of active treatment, but not at the end of follow-up, effects of primary outcomes (e.g. remission from binge eating, EDE shape concern) were better for CBT-L than for CBT-S. Dropout rates were significantly higher in CBT-L (35%) than in CBT-S (14%). Moderator analyses revealed that treatment efficacy for rapid responders and individuals exhibiting high scores on the mixed dietary negative affect subtype differed between the CBT-L and CBT-S with respect to objective binges, restraint eating and eating concern. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that CBT in general represents an effective treatment for BED, but that subgroups of patients might profit more from a prolonged treatment. Short, less-intensive CBT treatments could nevertheless be a viable option in the treatment of BED.
Authors: Heather Thompson-Brenner; Debra L Franko; Douglas R Thompson; Carlos M Grilo; Christina L Boisseau; James P Roehrig; Lauren K Richards; Susan W Bryson; Cynthia M Bulik; Scott J Crow; Michael J Devlin; Amy A Gorin; Jean L Kristeller; Robin Masheb; James E Mitchell; Carol B Peterson; Debra L Safer; Ruth H Striegel; Denise E Wilfley; G Terence Wilson Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2013-05-06
Authors: D Catherine Walker; Joseph M Donahue; Sydney Heiss; Sasha Gorrell; Lisa M Anderson; Julia M Brooks; Emily P Ehrlich; Julie N Morison; Drew A Anderson Journal: Eat Weight Disord Date: 2020-06-07 Impact factor: 3.008