Eating Disorders Flashcards
Anorexia Nervosa
Diagnostic Criteria - DSM-IV TR (APA, 2000)
- Refusal to maintain body weight over a minimally acceptable weight for age and height (
Bulimia Nervosa
Diagnostic Criteria - DSM-IV TR (APA, 2000)
- Recurrent episodes of binge-eating.
- Recurrent inappropriate compensatory behaviour in order to avoid weight gain.
- Minimum average of 2 episodes of binge eating and inappropriate compensatory behaviours per week for the last 3 months.
- Self-evaluation unduly influenced by body shape and weight.
- The disturbance does not occur exclusively during periods of anorexia.2 subtypes: purging & non-purging
Binge Eating Disorder
Diagnostic Criteria - DSM-IV TR (APA, 2000)
- Recurrent episodes of binge eating (eating more than others in a discreet time period with a sense of lack of control)
- BE episode associated with 3+ of
a) eating more rapidly than usualb) eating until uncomfortably ill c) eating lots when not hungry d) eating alone due to embarrassment e) feelings of guilt disgust or depression after overeating
- Marked distress regarding bingeing
- BE occurs on average on at least 2 days a week for at least 6 mths
- BE not associated with inappropriate compensatory behaviours and does not occur exclusively during episodes AN or BN
Co-morbid Conditions (Davey, 2008)
AN Depression OCD BN Depression BPP Substance abuse BED Associated with depression, impaired work and social functioning, low self-esteem and body shape dissatisfaction
Patient Perspectives on Causes of AN
Nilsson et al (2007)
Swedish study; interviewed people who had accessed C & A psychiatric clinics 8 & 16 yrs after initial assessment (median age 15 yrs)
Responses subjected to content analysis
At 8 yr follow-up recovery rate = 68%
At 16 yr follow-up recovery rate = 85%
Attributions
8 yr follow-up
13% had no explanation
High own demands/perfectionism most common
16 yr follow-up
1.5% had no explanation
High own demands/perfectionism most common
More answers related to family causes e.g. illness, expectations, disputes
Other Findings
Frequency of causal attributions to sports requirements, peer relationships, developmental tasks and domestic upheaval stable across follow-ups
No differences in causes identified by those who had recovered compared with those who had not
4 Components (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1982)
Stages of change
See diagram on previous slide
Decisional balance
Pros & cons of behaviour and beliefs
Self-efficacy
Confidence in ability to cope with demands
Processes of change
Cognitive and then behavioural
Engagement Issues for AN
AN
Denial
Not entirely deliberate (Vitousek et al, 1998)
Resistant to treatment
Passive-aggressive (Treasure & Ward, 1997)
AN is egosyntonic & increasingly reinforcing (Halmi et al, 2005)
TA difficult to establish
Risks include premature discharge, punitive treatment and strong helper responses (Vitousek et al, 1998)
Halmi et al (2005)
3 centre study in USA
Ss (122) diagnosed AN, aged 14-50 yrs
Examined dropout, treatment acceptance and treatment completion rates in 3 conditions; CBT, SSRI (fluoxetine) and both combined
Considered predictors
Highest rate of attrition occurred in the first 5 weeks of treatment
Only predictor of completion was self-esteem
Low S-E – 40% completed
High S-E – 80% completed
Concluded need to increase acceptance and self-esteem to reduce dropout, and medication alone unsuitable treatment option
Engagement Issues BN
BN
Usually higher level of motivation
92% BN self-refer vs. 19% AN (Bemis, 1986)
Less resistant to treatment as condition is egodystonic
However ambivalence about relinquishing ideals and loss of coping strategy likely (Vitousek et al, 1998)
Shame acts as a barrier
Motivational Interviewing
Developed by Miller & Rollnick (1991)
Effectiveness demonstrated in alcohol abuse settings
Linked to TTM in literature
However no theoretical or empirical connection exist between the two (Wilson & Schlam, 2004)
Some inconsistencies exist e.g. stages & timing
Considered as an adjunct to therapy but should be part of CBT anyway (Wilson & Schlam, 2004)
MI Principles
Express empathy
Support self-efficacy
Roll with resistance
Develop discrepancy
MI Approach
Increase awareness of importance of change
Increase confidence in ability to deal with change
Use socratic method
Cognitive strategies before behavioural
Be collaborative
Be empathic
Validate client’s experience (Vitousek et al, 1998)
Double sided reflections
Patient: I am not prepared to let my weight go
above 35 kg.
Therapist: You’re terrified about what will happen if
you start to attend to your nutritional
needs [empathy with the fear of change]
and you know that there are clear signs
that your body is suffering when your
weight is below 40 kg – for example your
blood glucose runs at a dangerously low
level and your bones are continuing to dissolve.
(Treasure, 2004)