M V Solanto1, M S Jacobson, L Heller, N H Golden, S Hertz. 1. Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Schneider Children's Hospital, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, NY 11042.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the rate of weight gain of inpatients with anorexia nervosa under two behavioral contracts, differing in criterion weight gain required to earn increasing privileges. DESIGN: Follow-up comparison of cohorts receiving different interventions. SETTING: Eating disorders service, operating on a general adolescent medicine unit. PATIENTS: Patients admitted consecutively who met the following criteria: (1) weight at least 15% less than that expected for age, sex, and height; (2) female gender; (3) absence of chronic medical illness; (4) hospital stay of at least 28 days. Twenty-two patients meeting these criteria were treated between July 1987 and October 1988, when contract 1 was in effect. This cohort of patients was compared with a group of 31 patients, also meeting the these criteria, who were treated between November 1988 and December 1991, when contract 2 was in effect. INTERVENTIONS: The behavioral contract, signed by the patient on admission, specifies the minimum 4-day weight gain necessary to earn increasing ward privileges, such as use of phone, frequency of visits, etc. Contracts 1 and 2 differed only in the 4-day weight gain criterion: 0.8 lb (0.36 kg) and 1.2 lb (0.55 kg), respectively. RESULTS: The results of analysis of covariance, with admission weight as the covariate, revealed a significant interaction between contract and day, such that patients receiving contract 2 gained weight more rapidly (0.36 lb/d) than those receiving contract 1 (0.20 lb/d). There was no confounding difference between groups in the use of psychotropic medication, and no complications of refeeding in either group. CONCLUSION: Increasing the 4-day criterion weight gain from 0.8 to 1.2 lb in a behavioral contracting intervention was associated with a significant increase in the rate of weight gain, without an accompanying increase in complications of refeeding. This result simultaneously: (a) provides support for the efficacy of behavioral contracting and (b) reveals malleability in the rate of gain based on the targeted gain specified in the contract.
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the rate of weight gain of inpatients with anorexia nervosa under two behavioral contracts, differing in criterion weight gain required to earn increasing privileges. DESIGN: Follow-up comparison of cohorts receiving different interventions. SETTING: Eating disorders service, operating on a general adolescent medicine unit. PATIENTS: Patients admitted consecutively who met the following criteria: (1) weight at least 15% less than that expected for age, sex, and height; (2) female gender; (3) absence of chronic medical illness; (4) hospital stay of at least 28 days. Twenty-two patients meeting these criteria were treated between July 1987 and October 1988, when contract 1 was in effect. This cohort of patients was compared with a group of 31 patients, also meeting the these criteria, who were treated between November 1988 and December 1991, when contract 2 was in effect. INTERVENTIONS: The behavioral contract, signed by the patient on admission, specifies the minimum 4-day weight gain necessary to earn increasing ward privileges, such as use of phone, frequency of visits, etc. Contracts 1 and 2 differed only in the 4-day weight gain criterion: 0.8 lb (0.36 kg) and 1.2 lb (0.55 kg), respectively. RESULTS: The results of analysis of covariance, with admission weight as the covariate, revealed a significant interaction between contract and day, such that patients receiving contract 2 gained weight more rapidly (0.36 lb/d) than those receiving contract 1 (0.20 lb/d). There was no confounding difference between groups in the use of psychotropic medication, and no complications of refeeding in either group. CONCLUSION: Increasing the 4-day criterion weight gain from 0.8 to 1.2 lb in a behavioral contracting intervention was associated with a significant increase in the rate of weight gain, without an accompanying increase in complications of refeeding. This result simultaneously: (a) provides support for the efficacy of behavioral contracting and (b) reveals malleability in the rate of gain based on the targeted gain specified in the contract.
Authors: Andrea K Garber; Kasuen Mauldin; Nobuaki Michihata; Sara M Buckelew; Mary-Ann Shafer; Anna-Barbara Moscicki Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Andrea K Garber; Susan M Sawyer; Neville H Golden; Angela S Guarda; Debra K Katzman; Michael R Kohn; Daniel Le Grange; Sloane Madden; Melissa Whitelaw; Graham W Redgrave Journal: Int J Eat Disord Date: 2015-12-12 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Katrin Ziser; Katrin E Giel; Gaby Resmark; Christoph Nikendei; Hans-Christoph Friederich; Stephan Herpertz; Matthias Rose; Martina de Zwaan; Jörn von Wietersheim; Almut Zeeck; Andreas Dinkel; Markus Burgmer; Bernd Löwe; Carina Sprute; Stephan Zipfel; Florian Junne Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 4.241