Understanding community provider practices in diagnosing and treating atypical anorexia nervosa: A mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of consensus in defining "significant weight loss" when diagnosing atypical anorexia nervosa (atypical AN) and no guidelines exist for setting target weight (TW). The current study aimed to identify community providers' practices related to the diagnosis of atypical AN and the determination of TW. A secondary aim was to evaluate whether professional discipline impacted "significant weight loss" definitions. METHOD: A variety of providers (N = 141; 96.4% female) completed an online survey pertaining to diagnostic and treatment practices with atypical AN. Descriptive statistics were computed to characterize provider-based practices and Fisher's exact tests were used to test for differences in diagnostic practices by professional discipline. Thematic analysis was used to examine open-ended questions. RESULTS: Most (63.97%) providers diagnosed atypical AN in the absence of any weight loss if other AN criteria were met, but doctoral-level psychologists and medical professionals were less likely to do so compared to nutritional or other mental health professionals. Most providers found weight gain was only sometimes necessary for atypical AN recovery. Qualitative responses revealed providers found atypical AN to be a stigmatizing label that was not taken seriously. Providers preferred to use an individualized approach focused on behaviors, rather than weight when diagnosing and treating atypical AN. DISCUSSION: Lack of diagnostic clarity and concrete treatment guidelines for atypical AN may result in substantial deviations from the DSM-5-TR criteria in real-world practice. Clinically useful diagnostic definitions for restrictive eating disorders and evidence-based treatment guidelines for TW and/or other relevant recovery metrics are needed. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: The current study found variability in how community providers diagnose and determine target recovery weight for atypical anorexia nervosa (atypical AN). Many providers viewed the diagnosis of atypical AN as stigmatizing and preferred to focus on behaviors, rather than weight. This study underscores the importance of creating a clinically useful diagnostic definition and guidelines for recovery for atypical AN backed by empirical evidence that providers may implement in practice.

Ultraprocessed, hyper-palatable, and high energy density foods: Prevalence and distinction across 30 years in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Ultraprocessed foods (UPF), hyper-palatable foods (HPF), and high energy density (HED) foods may contribute to obesity risk. All have distinct definitions; however, it is unknown the degree to which they may identify overlapping or distinct foods. This study examined the availability of UPF, HPF, and HED foods in the US food system from 1988 to 2018 and the degree of distinction across definitions. METHODS: Four data sets representing the US food system (1988, 2001, 2006, 2018) from the US Department of Agriculture were analyzed. UPF were identified based on the extent of industrialized processing. HPF were identified using the standardized definition that specifies palatability-inducing nutrient combinations. HED was characterized as >2.0 kcal/g. RESULTS: Across years, 58% to 65% of foods were classified as UPF, 55% to 69% as HPF, and 37% to 47% as HED. Prevalence of UPF, HPF, and HED foods was higher in 2018 versus 1988 (p values < 0.001); HPF evidenced the largest increase (14%) and UPF evidenced the smallest (4%) over time. There was moderate to high overlap in foods (40%-70%) across definitions. CONCLUSIONS: Together, UPF, HPF, and HED foods comprise most foods in the US food supply. Changes in availability varied across definitions, with substantial increases in HPF and HED and relative stability of UPF.

Understanding outcomes in family-based treatment for adolescent anorexia nervosa: a network approach.

BACKGROUND: Family-based treatment (FBT) is the first-line treatment for adolescent anorexia nervosa (AN). Yet, remission is not achieved for about half of adolescents with AN receiving FBT. Understanding patient- and parent-level factors that predict FBT response may inform treatment development and improve outcomes. METHODS: Network analysis was used to identify the most central symptoms of AN in adolescents who completed the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) prior to FBT (N = 409). Bridge pathways between adolescent AN and parental self-efficacy in facilitating their child's recovery from AN were identified in a subset of participants (n = 184). Central and bridge symptoms were tested as predictors of early response (⩾2.4 kg weight gain by the fourth session of FBT) and end-of-treatment weight restoration [⩾95% expected body weight (EBW)] and full remission (⩾95% EBW and EDE score within 1 standard deviation of norms). RESULTS: The most central symptoms of adolescent AN included desiring weight loss, dietary restraint, and feeling fat. These symptoms predicted early response, but not end-of-treatment outcomes. Bridge symptoms were parental beliefs about their responsibility to renourish their child, adolescent discomfort eating in front of others, and adolescent dietary restraint. Bridge symptoms predicted end-of-treatment weight restoration, but not early response nor full remission. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the prognostic utility of core symptoms of adolescent AN. Parent beliefs about their responsibility to renourish their child may maintain associations between parental self-efficacy and AN psychopathology. These findings could inform strategies to adapt FBT and improve outcomes.

Reward sensitivity, eating behavior, and obesity-related outcomes: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Previous research has identified reward sensitivity as an important factor that may contribute to the engagement in eating behavior (e.g., binge eating, emotional eating, etc.) and increase obesity risk. In the current study, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine the relationships between reward sensitivity, eating behavior, and obesity-related outcomes. The study focused on two commonly used measures of reward sensitivity in the literature: the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) and the Behavioral Inhibition Scale/Behavioral Activation Scale (BIS/BAS Scale). METHOD: We conducted a systematic search to identify studies that analyzed reward sensitivity as a predictor of eating behavior or obesity-related outcomes, and measured reward sensitivity using the SPSRQ or BIS/BAS Scale. The search yielded N=19 total publications included in the review. RESULTS: Findings indicated that reward sensitivity, primarily measured by summary scores on the SPSRQ or BIS/BAS Scale, were positively associated with a variety of eating behaviors and obesity-related outcomes with small to moderate effect sizes. Findings were most consistent across studies that examined the association between reward sensitivity and eating behavior outcomes (e.g., binge eating, emotional eating) (r values= .08 to .41; p values < .001 to p < .05) and food consumption outcomes (e.g., palatable food intake) (r values = .21 to .40; p < .001 to p values < .05). Findings were less consistent for food craving and BMI outcomes, and revealed these relationships may depend on individual-level factors and/or environment-related factors, (e.g., food cues). A quality evaluation using the Critical Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS tool) indicated that most studies were rated as moderate to strong quality (84%). CONCLUSION: Findings indicate that elevated reward sensitivity may be a risk factor for engagement in eating behaviors that may increase obesity risk.