Therapist written goodbye letters: evidence for therapeutic benefits in the treatment of anorexia nervosa.

BACKGROUND: Despite their use in clinical practice, there is little evidence to support the use of therapist written goodbye letters as therapeutic tools. However, preliminary evidence suggests that goodbye letters may have benefits in the treatment of anorexia nervosa (AN). AIMS: This study aimed to examine whether therapist written goodbye letters were associated with improvements in body mass index (BMI) and eating disorder symptomology in patients with AN after treatment. METHOD: Participants were adults with AN (n = 41) who received The Maudsley Model of Anorexia Treatment for Adults (MANTRA) in a clinical trial evaluating two AN out-patient treatments. As part of MANTRA, therapists wrote goodbye letters to patients. A rating scheme was developed to rate letters for structure and quality. Linear regression analyses were used to examine associations between goodbye letter scores and outcomes after treatment. RESULTS: Higher quality letters and letters that adopted a more affirming stance were associated with greater improvements in BMI at 12 months. Neither the overall quality nor the style of goodbye letters were associated with improvements in BMI at 24 months or reductions in eating disorder symptomology at either 12 or 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the potential importance of paying attention to the overall quality of therapist written goodbye letters in the treatment of AN, and adopting an affirming stance.

Written case formulations in the treatment of anorexia nervosa: Evidence for therapeutic benefits.

OBJECTIVE: Case formulation is a core component of many psychotherapies and formulation letters may provide an opportunity to enhance the therapeutic alliance and improve treatment outcomes. This study aimed to determine if formulation letters predict treatment satisfaction, session attendance, and symptom reductions in anorexia nervosa (AN). It was hypothesized that higher quality formulation letters would predict greater treatment satisfaction, a greater number of attended sessions, and greater improvement in eating disorder symptoms. METHOD: Patients were adult outpatients with AN (n = 46) who received Maudsley Anorexia Nervosa Treatment for Adults (MANTRA) in the context of a clinical trial. A Case Formulation Rating Scheme was used to rate letters for adherence to the MANTRA model and use of a collaborative, reflective, affirming stance. Analyses included linear regression and mixed models. RESULTS: Formulation letters that paid attention to the development of the AN predicted greater treatment acceptability ratings (p = 0.002). More reflective and respectful letters predicted greater reductions in Eating Disorder Examination scores (p = 0.003). DISCUSSION: Results highlight the potential significance of a particular style of written formulation as part of treatment for AN. Future research should examine applicability to other psychiatric disorders. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.(Int J Eat Disord 2016; 49:874-882).

Two-year follow-up of the MOSAIC trial: A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing two psychological treatments in adult outpatients with broadly defined anorexia nervosa.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports follow-up data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial (n = 142) comparing the Maudsley Model of Anorexia Nervosa Treatment for Adults (MANTRA) with Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) in outpatients with broadly defined anorexia nervosa (AN). At 12 months postrandomization, all patients had statistically significant improvements in body mass index (BMI), eating disorder (ED) symptomatology and other outcomes with no differences between groups. MANTRA was more acceptable to patients. The present study assessed whether gains were maintained at 24 months postrandomization. METHODS: Follow-up data at 24 months were obtained from 73.2% of participants. Outcome measures included BMI, ED symptomatology, distress, impairment, and additional service utilization during the study period. Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed models. RESULTS: There were few differences between groups. In both treatment groups, improvements in BMI, ED symptomatology, distress levels, and clinical impairment were maintained or increased further. Estimated mean BMI change from baseline to 24 months was 2.16 kg/m(2) for SSCM and 2.25 kg/m(2) for MANTRA (effect sizes of 1.75 and 1.83, respectively). Most participants (83%) did not require any additional intensive treatments (e.g., hospitalization). Two SSCM patients became overweight through binge-eating. DISCUSSION: Both treatments have value as outpatient interventions for patients with AN. © 2016 Crown copyright. International Journal of Eating Disorders. (Int J Eat Disord 2016; 49:793-800).

Neuro- and social-cognitive clustering highlights distinct profiles in adults with anorexia nervosa.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the neuro- and social-cognitive profile of a consecutive series of adult outpatients with anorexia nervosa (AN) when compared with widely available age and gender matched historical control data. The relationship between performance profiles, clinical characteristics, service utilization, and treatment adherence was also investigated. METHOD: Consecutively recruited outpatients with a broad diagnosis of AN (restricting subtype AN-R: n = 44, binge-purge subtype AN-BP: n = 33 or Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified-AN subtype EDNOS-AN: n = 23) completed a comprehensive set of neurocognitive (set-shifting, central coherence) and social-cognitive measures (Emotional Theory of Mind). Data were subjected to hierarchical cluster analysis and a discriminant function analysis. RESULTS: Three separate, meaningful clusters emerged. Cluster 1 (n = 45) showed overall average to high average neuro- and social- cognitive performance, Cluster 2 (n = 38) showed mixed performance characterized by distinct strengths and weaknesses, and Cluster 3 (n = 17) showed poor overall performance (Autism Spectrum disorder (ASD) like cluster). The three clusters did not differ in terms of eating disorder symptoms, comorbid features or service utilization and treatment adherence. A discriminant function analysis confirmed that the clusters were best characterized by performance in perseveration and set-shifting measures. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that considerable neuro- and social-cognitive heterogeneity exists in patients with AN, with a subset showing ASD-like features. The value of this method of profiling in predicting longer term patient outcomes and in guiding development of etiologically targeted treatments remains to be seen.

Process evaluation of the maudsley model for treatment of adults with anorexia nervosa trial. Part II: Patient experiences of two psychological therapies for treatment of anorexia nervosa.

OBJECTIVE: This study is the second part of a process evaluation, embedded in the MOSAIC study, a large randomised controlled trial comparing two different psychological therapies, the Maudsley Model for Treatment of Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) and Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM). The study adopted a qualitative approach to examine patient experiences of the two treatments. METHOD: Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted with Anorexia Nervosa and Eating Disorder Not Otherwise Specified-Anorexia Nervosa type patients, and transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Patient responses yielded five main themes: positive and helpful aspects, beneficial outcomes, less helpful aspects, possible improvements to the treatments, and the therapeutic and external environment. The findings show clear differences and some overlaps between patients' views on MANTRA and SSCM. DISCUSSION: Both therapies were experienced by patients as credible and largely helpful, albeit in different ways. These results are in agreement with those of therapists' views on these treatments.

Process evaluation of the MOSAIC Trial, Part I: Therapist experiences of delivering two psychological therapies for treatment of anorexia nervosa.

OBJECTIVES: Forming part of a process evaluation of a large randomised controlled trial (the Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related conditions, MOSAIC) comparing two outpatient therapies for Anorexia Nervosa (AN), the Maudsley Model for Treatment of Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) and Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM), this study adopted a qualitative approach to examine therapist experiences of treatment delivery. METHOD: Twenty MOSAIC therapists completed semi-structured interviews. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Themes of positive aspects, challenges and therapeutic fit emerged. MANTRA was seen as structured and flexible but could feel demanding on therapist time and skill. The slow pace and narrower focus of SSCM gave patients space to talk, but the lack of psychological tools and nutritional emphasis could create frustration. Views on the therapeutic relationship and patient-therapy fit differed across treatments. DISCUSSION: Findings provide testable hypotheses about what works for whom, ideas for therapist training, treatment development and delivery.

Process evaluation of the MOSAIC trial: treatment experience of two psychological therapies for out-patient treatment of Anorexia Nervosa.

BACKGROUND: This study is part of a series of process evaluations within the MOSAIC Trial (Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related Conditions). This randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared two psychological treatments, the Maudsley Model for Treatment of Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) and Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) for adult outpatients with Anorexia Nervosa. The present process study integrates quantitative (treatment acceptability and credibility) and qualitative (written) feedback to evaluate patients' treatment experiences. METHOD: All 142 MOSAIC participants were asked to (a) rate treatment acceptability and credibility on visual analogue scales (VAS) at six and 12 months post-randomisation, and (b) provide written feedback regarding their views on their treatment at 12 months. Transcripts were first analysed thematically and then rated according to the global valence of feedback (positive, mixed/negative). RESULTS: 114/142 (80.3 %) MOSAIC participants provided VAS data and 82 (57.7 %) provided written feedback. At 12 months, MANTRA patients gave significantly higher acceptability and credibility ratings compared to SSCM patients. A significantly higher proportion of MANTRA patients provided written feedback. MANTRA patients also tended to write in more detail and to give globally more positive feedback when compared to individuals receiving SSCM. Qualitative themes suggest that patients experienced the two treatments differently in terms of characteristics and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the benefits of incorporating qualitative and quantitative data into RCT process evaluations. MANTRA patients were more willing to express their views on treatment and generally felt more positively about this than those receiving SSCM.

The Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related Conditions (MOSAIC): Comparison of the Maudsley Model of Anorexia Nervosa Treatment for Adults (MANTRA) with specialist supportive clinical management (SSCM) in outpatients with broadly defined anorexia nervosa: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Anorexia nervosa (AN) in adults has poor outcomes, and treatment evidence is limited. This study evaluated the efficacy and acceptability of a novel, targeted psychological therapy for AN (Maudsley Model of Anorexia Nervosa Treatment for Adults; MANTRA) compared with Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM). METHOD: One hundred forty-two outpatients with broadly defined AN (body mass index [BMI] ≤ 18.5 kg/m²) were randomly allocated to receive 20 to 30 weekly sessions (depending on clinical severity) plus add-ons (4 follow-up sessions, optional sessions with dietician and with carers) of MANTRA (n = 72) or SSCM (n = 70). Assessments were administered blind to treatment condition at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months after randomization. The primary outcome was BMI at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included eating disorders symptomatology, other psychopathology, neuro-cognitive and social cognition, and acceptability. Additional service utilization was also assessed. Outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Both treatments resulted in significant improvements in BMI and reductions in eating disorders symptomatology, distress levels, and clinical impairment over time, with no statistically significant difference between groups at either 6 or 12 months. Improvements in neuro-cognitive and social-cognitive measures over time were less consistent. One SSCM patient died. Compared with SSCM, MANTRA patients rated their treatment as significantly more acceptable and credible at 12 months. There was no significant difference between groups in additional service consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments appear to have value as first-line outpatient interventions for patients with broadly defined AN. Longer term outcomes remain to be evaluated.

The MOSAIC study - comparison of the Maudsley Model of Treatment for Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) with Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) in outpatients with anorexia nervosa or eating disorder not otherwise specified, anorexia nervosa type: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a biologically based serious mental disorder with high levels of mortality and disability, physical and psychological morbidity and impaired quality of life. AN is one of the leading causes of disease burden in terms of years of life lost through death or disability in young women. Psychotherapeutic interventions are the treatment of choice for AN, but the results of psychotherapy depend critically on the stage of the illness. The treatment response in adults with a chronic form of the illness is poor and drop-out from treatment is high. Despite the seriousness of the disorder the evidence-base for psychological treatment of adults with AN is extremely limited and there is no leading treatment. There is therefore an urgent need to develop more effective treatments for adults with AN. The aim of the Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related Conditions (MOSAIC) is to evaluate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of two outpatient treatments for adults with AN, Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) and the Maudsley Model of Treatment for Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA). METHODS/DESIGN: 138 patients meeting the inclusion criteria are randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups (MANTRA or SSCM). All participants receive 20 once-weekly individual therapy sessions (with 10 extra weekly sessions for those who are severely ill) and four follow-up sessions with monthly spacing thereafter. There is also optional access to a dietician and extra sessions involving a family member or a close other. Body weight, eating disorder- related symptoms, neurocognitive and psychosocial measures, and service use data are measured during the course of treatment and across a one year follow up period. The primary outcome measure is body mass index (BMI) taken at twelve months after randomization. DISCUSSION: This multi-center study provides a large sample size, broad inclusion criteria and a follow-up period. However, the study has to contend with difficulties directly related to running a large multi-center randomized controlled trial and the psychopathology of AN. These issues are discussed.