Clinician perspectives of the implementation of an early intervention service for eating disorders in England: a mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: The First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service has been shown to reduce the wait for care and improve clinical outcomes in initial evaluations. These findings led to the national scaling of FREED in England. To support this scaling, we conducted a mixed method evaluation of the perceptions and experiences of clinicians in the early phases of scaling. The Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a conceptual lens to understand if and how FREED becomes embedded in routine practice. METHODS: The convergent mixed method evaluation included 21 semi-structured interviews with clinicians from early adopter sites and 211 surveys administered to clinicians before, immediately after and 3 months after the FREED training. The interview guide and survey included questions evaluating attitudes towards early intervention for eating disorders (EDs) and NPT mechanisms. Interview data were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. The NPT was applied to the inductively derived themes to evaluate if and how NPT domains impacted the implementation. Survey data were analysed using multilevel growth models. RESULTS: Six themes and 15 subthemes captured barriers and facilitators to implementation at the patient, clinician, service, intervention, implementation and wider system levels. These interacted with the NPT mechanisms to facilitate or hinder the embedding of FREED. Overall, clinicians were enthusiastic and positive towards early intervention for EDs and FREED, largely because of the expectation of improved patient outcomes. This was a considerable driver in the uptake and implementation of FREED. Clinicians also had reservations about capacity and the potential impact on other patients, which, at times, was a barrier for its use. The FREED training led to significant improvements in positive attitudes and NPT mechanisms that were largely maintained at the 3-month follow-up. However, negative attitudes did not significantly improve following training. CONCLUSIONS: Positive attitudes towards early intervention for EDs increased enthusiasm and engagement with the model. Features of the model and its implementation were effective at developing adopter commitment and capabilities. However, there were aspects of the model and its implementation which require attention in the future (e.g., capacity and the potential impact on the wider service).

National roll-out of early intervention for eating disorders: Process and clinical outcomes from first episode rapid early intervention for eating disorders.

AIM: First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) is an early intervention model for young people with recent-onset eating disorders (ED). Promising results from a previous single-centre study and a four-centre study (FREED-Up) have led to the rapid national scaling of FREED to ED services in England (FREED-4-All). Our aim was to evaluate duration of an untreated ED (DUED), wait time target adherence, and clinical outcomes in FREED-4-All and compare these to the (benchmark) findings of the earlier FREED-Up study. METHOD: FREED services submit de-identified data to the central FREED team quarterly. The current study covers the period between September 2018 and September 2021. This FREED-4-All dataset includes 2473 patients. These were compared to 278 patients from the FREED-Up study. RESULTS: DUED was substantially shorter in the FREED-4-All dataset relative to the FREED-Up study (15 vs. 18 months). Adherence to the wait time targets was comparable in both cohorts (~85% of engagement calls attempted in <2 days, ~50%-60% of assessments offered in <14 days, ~40% of treatment offered in <28 days). Patients in the FREED-4-All dataset experienced significant improvements in ED and general psychological symptoms from pre- to post-treatment that were comparable to the FREED-Up study. These findings should be interpreted cautiously as only 6% of FREED-4-All patients had post-treatment data. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the FREED-4-All evaluation suggest that FREED is replicating at scale. However, these data are flawed, uncertain, proximate, and sparse and should therefore be used carefully alongside other evidence and clinical experience to inform decision making.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on referral numbers, diagnostic mix, and symptom severity in Eating Disorder Early Intervention Services in England.

OBJECTIVE: First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) is a service model and care pathway which aims to provide timely, well-coordinated, developmentally informed and evidence-based care for young people with eating disorders (EDs). This article investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on FREED patient presentations and service provision in England. METHOD: Data from three services spanning the pre- to post-pandemic period were included (January 2019-September 2021; n = 502 patients). Run charts were created to analyze changes in monthly baseline patient data (e.g., referral numbers, duration of an untreated ED, diagnostic mix, and average body mass index for patients with anorexia nervosa [AN]). RESULTS: Significant increases in referral numbers were found from September 2020 onward, coinciding with the end of the first UK national lockdown. The percentage of AN presentations significantly increased after the onset of the first national lockdown (April 2020-December 2020). No other significant change patterns were identified. DISCUSSION: There have been substantial increases in referral numbers and presentations of AN to FREED services whereas illness severity seems largely unchanged. Together, this suggests that increased referrals cannot be attributed to milder presentations being seen. Implications for the implementation, funding, and sustainability of the model are discussed. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: Our research suggests that early intervention eating disorder services across England faced significant increases in patient referrals and presentations of anorexia nervosa over the COVID-19 pandemic. This increase in referrals is not due to a rise in milder eating disorder cases, as baseline symptom severity remained stable across the pandemic. Investment in early intervention for eating disorders must therefore match increased referral trends.

A Delphi study to explore clinician and lived experience perspectives on setting priorities in eating disorder services.

BACKGROUND: Due to scarce resources and high demand, priority setting in mental health services is necessary and inevitable. To date, no study has examined priority setting in eating disorder (ED) services specifically. Here, we evaluate the level of consensus and perceived relative importance of factors used to determine patient prioritisation in ED services, amongst clinicians and individuals with lived experience (LE) of an ED. METHODS: A three round Delphi study and a ranking task were used to determine the level of consensus and importance. Consensus was defined as > 80% agreement or disagreement. Items that reached consensus for agreement were ranked in order of importance from most to least important. Participants were 50 ED clinicians and 60 LE individuals. Participant retention across rounds 2, 3, and 4 were 92%, 85%, and 79%, respectively. RESULTS: Over three iterative rounds, a total of 87 statements about patient prioritisation were rated on a 5-point Likert-scale of agreement. Twenty-three items reached consensus in the clinician panel and 20 items reached consensus in the LE panel. The pattern of responding was broadly similar across the panels. The three most important items in both panels were medical risk, overall severity, and physical health deteriorating quickly. Clinicians tended to place greater emphasis on physical risk and early intervention whereas the LE panel focused more on mental health and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Eating disorder services tend to prioritise patients based upon medical risk and severity, and then by the order in which patients are referred. Our findings align in some respects with what is observed in services, but diverge in others (e.g., prioritising on quality of life), providing important novel insights into clinician and LE opinions on waiting list prioritisation in EDs. More research is warranted to validate these findings using multi-criterion decision techniques and observational methods. We hope these findings provide a foundation for future research and encourage evidence-based conversations around priority setting in ED services.

Assessing implementation fidelity in the First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders service model.

BACKGROUND: The First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service model is associated with significant reductions in wait times and improved clinical outcomes for emerging adults with recent-onset eating disorders. An understanding of how FREED is implemented is a necessary precondition to enable an attribution of these findings to key components of the model, namely the wait-time targets and care package. AIMS: This study evaluated fidelity to the FREED service model during the multicentre FREED-Up study. METHOD: Participants were 259 emerging adults (aged 16-25 years) with an eating disorder of <3 years duration, offered treatment through the FREED care pathway. Patient journey records documented patient care from screening to end of treatment. Adherence to wait-time targets (engagement call within 48 h, assessment within 2 weeks, treatment within 4 weeks) and care package, and differences in adherence across diagnosis and treatment group were examined. RESULTS: There were significant increases (16-40%) in adherence to the wait-time targets following the introduction of FREED, irrespective of diagnosis. Receiving FREED under optimal conditions also increased adherence to the targets. Care package use differed by component and diagnosis. The most used care package activities were psychoeducation and dietary change. Attention to transitions was less well used. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an indication of adherence levels to key components of the FREED model. These adherence rates can tentatively be considered as clinically meaningful thresholds. Results highlight aspects of the model and its implementation that warrant future examination.

Visual statistical learning and integration of perceptual priors are intact in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

BACKGROUND: Deficits in visual statistical learning and predictive processing could in principle explain the key characteristics of inattention and distractibility in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Specifically, from a Bayesian perspective, ADHD may be associated with flatter likelihoods (increased sensory processing noise), and/or difficulties in generating or using predictions. To our knowledge, such hypotheses have never been directly tested. METHODS: We here test these hypotheses by evaluating whether adults diagnosed with ADHD (n = 17) differed from a control group (n = 30) in implicitly learning and using low-level perceptual priors to guide sensory processing. We used a visual statistical learning task in which participants had to estimate the direction of a cloud of coherently moving dots. Unbeknown to the participants, two of the directions were more frequently presented than the others, creating an implicit bias (prior) towards those directions. This task had previously revealed differences in other neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autistic spectrum disorder and schizophrenia. RESULTS: We found that both groups acquired the prior expectation for the most frequent directions and that these expectations substantially influenced task performance. Overall, there were no group differences in how much the priors influenced performance. However, subtle group differences were found in the influence of the prior over time. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity in ADHD do not stem from broad difficulties in developing and/or using low-level perceptual priors.

Acquisition of visual priors and induced hallucinations in chronic schizophrenia.

Prominent theories suggest that symptoms of schizophrenia stem from learning deficiencies resulting in distorted internal models of the world. To test these theories further, we used a visual statistical learning task known to induce rapid implicit learning of the stimulus statistics. In this task, participants are presented with a field of coherently moving dots and are asked to report the presented direction of the dots (estimation task), and whether they saw any dots or not (detection task). Two of the directions were more frequently presented than the others. In controls, the implicit acquisition of the stimuli statistics influences their perception in two ways: (i) motion directions are perceived as being more similar to the most frequently presented directions than they really are (estimation biases); and (ii) in the absence of stimuli, participants sometimes report perceiving the most frequently presented directions (a form of hallucinations). Such behaviour is consistent with probabilistic inference, i.e. combining learnt perceptual priors with sensory evidence. We investigated whether patients with chronic, stable, treated schizophrenia (n = 20) differ from controls (n = 23) in the acquisition of the perceptual priors and/or their influence on perception. We found that although patients were slower than controls, they showed comparable acquisition of perceptual priors, approximating the stimulus statistics. This suggests that patients have no statistical learning deficits in our task. This may reflect our patients' relative wellbeing on antipsychotic medication. Intriguingly, however, patients experienced significantly fewer (P = 0.016) hallucinations of the most frequently presented directions than controls when the stimulus was absent or when it was very weak (prior-based lapse estimations). This suggests that prior expectations had less influence on patients' perception than on controls when stimuli were absent or below perceptual threshold.