Autopsy of a failed trial part 1: A qualitative investigation of clinician's views on and experiences of the implementation of the DAISIES trial in UK-based intensive eating disorder services.

OBJECTIVE: The DAISIES trial, comparing inpatient and stepped-care day patient treatment for adults with severe anorexia nervosa was prematurely terminated in March 2022 due to poor recruitment. This qualitative study seeks to understand the difficulties faced during the trial by investigating stakeholders' views on and experiences of its implementation. METHOD: Semi-structured interview and focus group transcripts, and trial management and oversight group meeting minutes from May 2020-June 2022 were analysed using thematic analysis. Participants were 47 clinicians and co-investigators involved with the DAISIES trial. The Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework was applied to the interpretive themes to classify barriers and facilitators to implementation. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: incompatible participation interests; changing standard practice; concerns around clinical management; systemic capacity and capability issues; and Covid-19 disrupting implementation. Applying the NASSS framework indicated the greatest implementation challenges to arise with the adopters (e.g. patients, clinicians), the organisational systems (e.g. service capacity), and the wider socio-political context (e.g. Covid-19 closing services). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasise the top-down impact of systemic-level research implementation challenges. The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic accentuated pre-existing organisational barriers to trial implementation within intensive eating disorder services, further limiting the capacity for research.

Prevalence of High-Risk Disordered Eating Amongst Adolescents and Young Adults in the Middle East: A Scoping Review.

High-risk disordered eating (HRDE) negatively affects physical, mental, and social wellbeing. This scoping review aimed to estimate the prevalence of HRDE amongst adolescents and young adults in the Middle East. MEDLINE database was searched for studies published in English or Arabic from 1 January 2000 to 30 September 2020, estimating HRDE prevalence (using the Eating Attitudes Test 26 or 40 item questionnaire) in the Middle East. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts of potentially eligible records, followed by data extraction from eligible studies. Nineteen studies (n = 16,288; 65.8% female) from Egypt, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Oman, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates were included. Prevalence of HRDE varied considerably across countries and was lowest amongst adolescents in Israel (F 8.2%; M 2.8%) and highest amongst university students in Egypt (F 75.8%; M 69.6%). Prevalence of high-risk for anorexia nervosa ranged from 0.0% in Jordan to 9.5% in Oman; high-risk for bulimia nervosa from 0.6% in Jordan to 1.0% in the United Arab Emirates; and high-risk for binge eating disorder was 1.0% and 1.8% in Turkey and Jordan, respectively. Future studies should employ a standardized two-stage design with clinical diagnosis to verify the prevalence of abnormal eating behaviours in the Middle East.

Clinicians' perspectives on supporting individuals with severe anorexia nervosa in specialist eating disorder intensive treatment settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected intensive treatment settings (i.e., inpatient [IP] and day patient [DP]) in specialist eating disorder services. However, the impact on clinicians working in these services is largely unknown. We therefore explored the perspectives of those supporting individuals with severe anorexia nervosa (AN) in intensive treatment settings during the pandemic. METHODS: Between May 2020 and June 2021, we interviewed clinicians (n = 21) who delivered IP and/or DP treatment to patients with severe AN in four specialist eating disorder services in the United Kingdom. Data relating to experiences during COVID-19 were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We identified six themes: Disruptions to Routine Treatment; Introduction of Virtual Treatment; Separation from Treatment, Others and the World; Impact on Recovery; Impact on Staff; and Pressure on Referral Pathways. COVID-19 posed significant challenges to IP and DP services: forcing closures, operating with restrictions and virtual treatment, and impacting delivery of essential treatment components, referral pathways, clinician wellbeing, risk management, and patient isolation and recovery trajectories. Opportunities arose, in particular in DP services offering virtual support. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 challenged the continuation of multidisciplinary treatment. The findings underline the necessity for medical, psychological, practical, and nutritional support, as well as carer involvement and fostering social connections to remain at the forefront of intensive treatment for severe AN. They also emphasise the uncertainty surrounding which intensive treatment may be best suited to which patient when, particularly within the context of virtual DP support.

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected eating disorder inpatient and day patient treatment. However, the impact of the pandemic on clinicians working in these settings is largely unknown. We interviewed twenty-one clinicians working in specialist inpatient and day patient eating disorder services to explore their views on supporting people with severe anorexia nervosa during the pandemic. We analysed the transcripts using thematic analysis. We identified that COVID-19 posed significant challenges for intensive treatment settings, forcing the closure or merging of eating disorder services, the delivery of treatment under restrictions, and the introduction of virtual treatment. These changes challenged the delivery of multidisciplinary treatment for people with severe anorexia nervosa and impacted referral pathways, clinicians' wellbeing, risk management, and patients' isolation and recovery trajectories. We also identified some opportunities as a result of the pandemic, in particular in day patient services offering virtual support. These opportunities included more accessible treatment for patients and their families, more individualised treatment, and the chance for treatment innovation and creativity.

Clinicians' perspectives on supporting individuals with severe anorexia nervosa in specialist eating disorder intensive treatment settings.

BACKGROUND: Admissions to intensive treatment (i.e., inpatient [IP] and/or day patient [DP]) for individuals with severe anorexia nervosa (AN) are common. Growing literature indicates potential risks and benefits of each intensive treatment approach; however, existing research has focused on patient and carer perspectives of these treatments. Also, there is scant empirical evidence available for guiding the parameters of intensive treatments for AN. We therefore explored clinicians' perspectives and experience of supporting adults with severe AN in intensive settings. METHODS: We conducted twenty one semi-structured interviews with clinicians who deliver intensive treatments (i.e., IP and/or DP) for individuals with severe AN across four specialist Eating Disorder Services in the United Kingdom between May 2020 and June 2021. We asked clinicians about their views and experiences of supporting individuals with severe AN in intensive treatment settings and the challenges and opportunities associated with IP and DP treatment. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis supported by NVivo software. RESULTS: Five broad and interrelated themes were identified: (1) Intensive Support; (2) The Severity of Patients' Illnesses; (3) Hope and Recovery; (4) Which Treatment When; (5) Limited Resources; and (6) Carer Burden. We identified various similarities between the two intensive treatment approaches, including the value of intensive and multidisciplinary support and carer involvement, and the challenge of managing complex and unique needs in resource-limited intensive settings. We also found differences in the relationship of treatment to patients' home environments, the necessity of patient motivation, and the management of risk. CONCLUSIONS: Both intensive treatment settings are valued by clinicians; however, there are unique challenges and opportunities for supporting individuals with severe AN within each. Our findings suggest DP treatment may be used as an alternative to IP treatment for individuals with severe AN. However, clear questions remain over which intensive treatment setting is best suited to which patient when and should be the focus of future research.

Some people with anorexia nervosa will need intensive treatment (e.g., inpatient and day patient treatment) during the course of their illness. We interviewed twenty-one clinicians working in Specialist Eating Disorder Services to explore their views on supporting people with severe anorexia nervosa in inpatient and day patient services and about the perceived advantages and disadvantages of these. We analysed the transcripts of these interviews using thematic analysis. We identified similarities between the two intensive treatment approaches. These included the value of intensive and multidisciplinary support, the importance of carer involvement, and the challenge of managing patient's complex and unique needs in services with limited resources. We also found differences between inpatient and day patient treatment. These included how treatment relates to patients' home environments, the importance of patient motivation, and managing risk. Day patient treatment may be an alternative to inpatient treatment for people with severe anorexia nervosa. Future research should investigate which intensive treatment setting is best suited to which patient and when.

The risk of eating disorders comorbid with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There has been interest in whether people with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are at higher risk of developing an Eating Disorder (ED). The aim of this study was estimate the size of this association with a meta-analysis of studies. METHODS: We retrieved studies following PRISMA guidelines from a broad range of databases. RESULTS: Twelve studies fitted our primary aim in investigating ED in ADHD populations (ADHD = 4,013/Controls = 29,404), and five exploring ADHD in ED populations (ED = 1,044/Controls = 11,292). The pooled odds ratio of diagnosing any ED in ADHD was increased significantly, 3.82 (95% CI:2.34-6.24). A similar level of risk was found across all ED syndromes [Anorexia Nervosa = 4.28 (95% CI:2.24-8.16); Bulimia Nervosa = 5.71 (95% CI: 3.56-9.16) and Binge Eating Disorder = 4.13 (95% CI:3-5.67)]. The risk was significantly higher if ADHD was diagnosed using a clinical interview [5.89 (95% CI:4.32-8.04)] rather than a self-report instrument [2.23 (95% CI:1.23-4.03)]. The pooled odds ratio of diagnosing ADHD in participants with ED was significantly increased, 2.57 (95% CI:1.30-5.11). Subgroup analysis of cohorts with binge eating only yielded a risk of 5.77 (95% CI:2.35-14.18). None of the variables examined in meta-regression procedures explained the variance in effect size between studies. DISCUSSION: People with ADHD have a higher risk of comorbidity with an ED and people with an ED also have higher levels of comorbidity with ADHD. Future studies should address if patients with this comorbidity have a different prognosis, course and treatment response when compared to patients with either disorder alone. RESUMEN OBJETIVO: Ha habido interés en saber si la gente con Trastorno por Déficit de Atención e Hiperactividad (TDAH) están en mayor riesgo de desarrollar un Trastorno de la Conducta Alimentaria (TCA). El objetivo de este estudio fue estimar el tamaño de esta asociación con un meta-análisis de los estudios. Métodos: Recuperamos estudios de una amplia gama base de datos,  que siguen los lineamientos PRISMA. Resultados: Doce estudios encajaron con nuestro objetivo primario de investigar los TCA en poblaciones con TDAH (TDAH = 4,013/Controles = 29,404), y 5 exploraron TDAH en poblaciones con TCA (TCA = 1,044/Controles = 11,292). El odds ratio (OR) agrupado de diagnosticar cualquier TCA en el TDAH se incrementó significativamente, 3.82 (95% CI:2.34-6.24). Un nivel de riesgo similar fue encontrado en todos los síndromes de TCA [Anorexia Nervosa = 4.28 (95% CI:2.24-8.16); Bulimia Nervosa = 5.71 (95% CI:3.56-9.16) y Trastorno por Atracón = 4.13 (95% CI: 3-5.67)]. El riesgo fue significativamente mayor si el TDAH fue diagnosticado utilizando una entrevista clínica [5.89 (95% CI:4.32-8.04)] en lugar de un instrumento de auto-reporte [2.23 (95% CI:1.23-4.03)]. El odds ratio (OR) agrupado de diagnosticar TDAH en participantes con TCA fue significativamente incrementado, 2.57 (95% CI:1.30-5.11). El análisis de los subgrupos de cohort con atracones solamente produjo un riesgo de 5.77 (95% CI:2.35-14.18). Ninguna de las variables examinadas en los procedimientos de meta-regresión explicaron la varianza en el tamaño del efecto entre los estudios. Discusión: La gente con TDAH tiene un mayor riesgo de comorbilidad con un TCA y la gente con un TCA también tiene niveles altos de comorbilidad con TDAH. Los estudios futuros deberán abordar si los pacientes con esta comorbilidad tienen diferente pronóstico, curso y respuesta a tratamiento cuando son comparados con pacientes que solamente tienen uno de los trastornos.  © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2016) © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2016; 49:1045-1057).