Martina de Zwaan1,2, Stephan Herpertz3, Stephan Zipfel4, Jennifer Svaldi5,6, Hans-Christoph Friederich7,8, Frauke Schmidt1,2, Andreas Mayr9, Tony Lam10, Carmen Schade-Brittinger11, Anja Hilbert12. 1. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 2. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Medical University Hospital Erlangen, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. 3. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LWL-University, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany. 4. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Medical University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 5. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 6. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 7. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. 8. Department of General Internal Medicine and Psychosomatics, Medical University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 9. Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry, and Epidemiology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. 10. Netunion, Lausanne, Switzerland. 11. Coordinating Centre for Clinical Trials, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany. 12. Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Abstract
Importance: Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) represents the criterion standard for treatment of binge eating disorder (BED), most individuals do not have access to this specialized treatment. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of internet-based guided self-help (GSH-I) compared with traditional, individual face-to-face CBT. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Internet and Binge Eating Disorder (INTERBED) study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority clinical trial (treatment duration, 4 months; follow-ups, 6 months and 1.5 years). A volunteer sample of 178 adult outpatients with full or subsyndromal BED were recruited from 7 university-based outpatient clinics from August 1, 2010, through December 31, 2011; final follow-up assessment was in April 2014. Data analysis was performed from November 30, 2014, to May 27, 2015. Interventions: Participants received 20 individual face-to-face CBT sessions of 50 minutes each or sequentially completed 11 internet modules and had weekly email contacts. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the difference in the number of days with objective binge eating episodes (OBEs) during the previous 28 days between baseline and end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included OBEs at follow-ups, eating disorder and general psychopathologic findings, body mass index, and quality of life. Results:A total of 586 patients were screened, 178 were randomized, and 169 had at least one postbaseline assessment and constituted the modified intention-to-treat analysis group (mean [SD] age, 43.2 [12.3] years; 148 [87.6%] female); the 1.5-year follow-up was available in 116 patients. The confirmatory analysis using the per-protocol sample (n = 153) failed to show noninferiority of GSH-I (adjusted effect, 1.47; 95% CI, -0.01 to 2.91; P = .05). Using the modified intention-to-treat sample, GSH-I was inferior to CBT in reducing OBE days at the end of treatment (adjusted effect, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.17-3.05; P = .03). Exploratory longitudinal analyses also showed the superiority of CBT over GSH-I by the 6-month (adjusted effect, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23-0.55; P < .001) but not the 1.5-year follow-up (adjusted effect, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.54-1.50; P = .70). Reductions in eating disorder psychopathologic findings were significantly higher in the CBT group than in the GSH-I group at 6-month follow-up (adjusted effect, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.13; P = .005). No group differences were found for body mass index, general psychopathologic findings, and quality of life. Conclusions and Relevance: Face-to-face CBT leads to quicker and greater reductions in the number of OBE days, abstinence rates, and eating disorder psychopathologic findings and may be a better initial treatment option than GSH-I. Internet-based guided self-help remains a viable, slower-acting, low-threshold treatment alternative compared with CBT for adults with BED. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN40484777 and germanctr.de Identifier: DRKS00000409.
RCT Entities:
Importance: Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) represents the criterion standard for treatment of binge eating disorder (BED), most individuals do not have access to this specialized treatment. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of internet-based guided self-help (GSH-I) compared with traditional, individual face-to-face CBT. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Internet and Binge Eating Disorder (INTERBED) study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority clinical trial (treatment duration, 4 months; follow-ups, 6 months and 1.5 years). A volunteer sample of 178 adult outpatients with full or subsyndromal BED were recruited from 7 university-based outpatient clinics from August 1, 2010, through December 31, 2011; final follow-up assessment was in April 2014. Data analysis was performed from November 30, 2014, to May 27, 2015. Interventions: Participants received 20 individual face-to-face CBT sessions of 50 minutes each or sequentially completed 11 internet modules and had weekly email contacts. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the difference in the number of days with objective binge eating episodes (OBEs) during the previous 28 days between baseline and end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included OBEs at follow-ups, eating disorder and general psychopathologic findings, body mass index, and quality of life. Results: A total of 586 patients were screened, 178 were randomized, and 169 had at least one postbaseline assessment and constituted the modified intention-to-treat analysis group (mean [SD] age, 43.2 [12.3] years; 148 [87.6%] female); the 1.5-year follow-up was available in 116 patients. The confirmatory analysis using the per-protocol sample (n = 153) failed to show noninferiority of GSH-I (adjusted effect, 1.47; 95% CI, -0.01 to 2.91; P = .05). Using the modified intention-to-treat sample, GSH-I was inferior to CBT in reducing OBE days at the end of treatment (adjusted effect, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.17-3.05; P = .03). Exploratory longitudinal analyses also showed the superiority of CBT over GSH-I by the 6-month (adjusted effect, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23-0.55; P < .001) but not the 1.5-year follow-up (adjusted effect, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.54-1.50; P = .70). Reductions in eating disorder psychopathologic findings were significantly higher in the CBT group than in the GSH-I group at 6-month follow-up (adjusted effect, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.13; P = .005). No group differences were found for body mass index, general psychopathologic findings, and quality of life. Conclusions and Relevance: Face-to-face CBT leads to quicker and greater reductions in the number of OBE days, abstinence rates, and eating disorder psychopathologic findings and may be a better initial treatment option than GSH-I. Internet-based guided self-help remains a viable, slower-acting, low-threshold treatment alternative compared with CBT for adults with BED. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN40484777 and germanctr.de Identifier: DRKS00000409.
Authors: Kimberly A Brownley; Nancy D Berkman; Christine M Peat; Kathleen N Lohr; Katherine E Cullen; Carla M Bann; Cynthia M Bulik Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Isabelle Carrard; Christelle Crépin; Patrick Rouget; Tony Lam; Martial Van der Linden; Alain Golay Journal: Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health Date: 2011-03-04
Authors: Elena Dragioti; Ioannis Dimoliatis; Konstantinos N Fountoulakis; Evangelos Evangelou Journal: Ann Gen Psychiatry Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Martina de Zwaan; Stephan Herpertz; Stephan Zipfel; Brunna Tuschen-Caffier; Hans-Christoph Friederich; Frauke Schmidt; Olaf Gefeller; Andreas Mayr; Tony Lam; Carmen Schade-Brittinger; Anja Hilbert Journal: Trials Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Elke D Ter Huurne; Hein A de Haan; Marloes G Postel; Cor A J DeJong; Joanne E L VanDerNagel; Job van der Palen Journal: Eat Weight Disord Date: 2020-05-24 Impact factor: 4.652
Authors: Ina Beintner; Bianka Vollert; Anna-Carlotta Zarski; Felix Bolinski; Peter Musiat; Dennis Görlich; David Daniel Ebert; Corinna Jacobi Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-08-15 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Marita Cooper; Erin E Reilly; Jaclyn A Siegel; Kathryn Coniglio; Shiri Sadeh-Sharvit; Emily M Pisetsky; Lisa M Anderson Journal: Eat Disord Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 3.222