| Literature DB >> 25416408 |
Antonios Dakanalis1, Giuseppe Carrà2, Rachel Calogero3, Maria Assunta Zanetti4, Santino Gaudio5, Riccardo Caccialanza6, Giuseppe Riva7,8, Massimo Clerici9.
Abstract
The original cognitive-behavioural (CB) model of bulimia nervosa, which provided the basis for the widely used CB therapy, proposed that specific dysfunctional cognitions and behaviours maintain the disorder. However, amongst treatment completers, only 40-50 % have a full and lasting response. The enhanced CB model (CB-E), upon which the enhanced version of the CB treatment was based, extended the original approach by including four additional maintenance factors. This study evaluated and compared both CB models in a large clinical treatment seeking sample (N = 679), applying both DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria for bulimic-type eating disorders. Application of the DSM-5 criteria reduced the number of cases of DSM-IV bulimic-type eating disorders not otherwise specified to 29.6 %. Structural equation modelling analysis indicated that (a) although both models provided a good fit to the data, the CB-E model accounted for a greater proportion of variance in eating-disordered behaviours than the original one, (b) interpersonal problems, clinical perfectionism and low self-esteem were indirectly associated with dietary restraint through over-evaluation of shape and weight, (c) interpersonal problems and mood intolerance were directly linked to binge eating, whereas restraint only indirectly affected binge eating through mood intolerance, suggesting that factors other than restraint may play a more critical role in the maintenance of binge eating. In terms of strength of the associations, differences across DSM-5 bulimic-type eating disorder diagnostic groups were not observed. The results are discussed with reference to theory and research, including neurobiological findings and recent hypotheses.Entities:
Keywords: Binge eating; Bulimic-type eating disorders; Cognitive-behavioural theory; DSM-5; Latent variable structural equation modelling; Maintenance factors
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25416408 DOI: 10.1007/s00406-014-0560-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci ISSN: 0940-1334 Impact factor: 5.270