Search

Objective: To inform the classification of bulimic-type eating disorders, the correlates of purging and non-purging methods of weight control were examined in a large community sample of young adult women reporting recurrent episodes of binge eating. Method: Scores on self-report measures of eating disorder psychopathology, functional impairment and health-service utilization were compared among individuals who reported (recurrent episodes of binge eating and) the use of either purging (self-induced vomiting, laxative or diuretic misuse; n = 41) or non-purging (extreme dietary restriction, excessive exercise, or use of diet pills; n = 62) methods of weight control. Individuals who reported recurrent binge eating in the absence of extreme weight control behaviours (n = 442) were also included in the analysis. Results: Non-purgers tended to be younger and heavier and have higher levels of eating disorder psychopathology and functional impairment than purgers and non-compensating binge eaters, however these differences were not statistically significant. Purgers were more likely than non-purgers to have sought treatment specifically for a problem with eating, however this difference was no longer significant after age and body mass index were statistically controlled. In multivariate analysis, frequency of extreme dietary restriction was the best predictor of functional impairment. Conclusions: These findings call into question the validity of subtyping of bulimia nervosa into purging and non-purging forms as outlined in the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

To examine the beliefs of women concerning causes and risk factors for eating-disordered behaviour.Face-to-face interviews were conducted with a community sample of 208 women aged 18-45 years. Respondents were presented with a vignette describing a fictional person meeting diagnostic criteria for bulimia nervosa (BN) and were asked to indicate whether each of several factors was 'very likely', 'likely' or 'not likely' to be a cause of the problem described, which factor was most likely to be a cause, and whether particular subgroups of people would be 'more likely', 'less likely' or 'equally likely' to have or develop the problem described.'Having low self-esteem' was considered very likely to be a cause of BN by 75.0% of respondents, and the most likely cause by 40.5% of respondents. Other factors perceived as significant were 'problems from childhood', 'portrayal of women in the media', 'being overweight as a child or adolescent' and 'day-to-day problems', while genetic factors and pre-existing psychological problems were perceived to be of minor significance. Most respondents believed that women aged under 25 years were at greatest risk of having or developing BN.Women's beliefs concerning causes and risk factors for BN are generally consistent with empirical evidence. However, information concerning the increased risk associated with pre-existing anxiety and affective disorders might usefully be included in prevention programs. Systematic investigation of the benefits of addressing individuals' beliefs concerning risk factors for eating disorders - as opposed to risk factors per se - would be of interest.

The aim was to compare symptomatic and functional outcomes over 5 years in women with regular subjective (SBEs), objective (OBEs), and no regular binge eating episodes.Data were derived from two cohorts of 330 women with high levels of eating disorders symptoms followed over 5 years. Three groups were formed: (a) regular SBEs but no regular OBEs (N = 68), (b) regular OBEs with or without regular SBEs (N = 154), and (c) with no regular binge eating episodes (N = 108).At baseline, the groups did not differ significantly in restraint scores and quality of life. People in the OBE group scored higher than those in the SBE group in body mass index (BMI). Those who had no regular binge eating had lower global Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) and weight and shape concern scores than those with regular SBEs, and lower eating concern scores than either binge eating groups. Across the follow-up, there were no significant effects of being in either binge eating or the nonbinge eating group on the rates of change in BMI, general psychological distress, quality of life, or EDE-Q scores with the exception that OBE group had a significantly different rate of change in eating concern and psychological distress compared to the group without regular binge eating.Individuals that report regular SBEs without regular OBEs represent a group with similar mental hardship and outcomes to those with regular OBEs. The findings support inclusion of regular SBEs in criteria for eating disorder diagnostic categories characterized by recurrent binge eating.

This study describes the development, content validity, and convergent validity of the Loss of Control over Eating Scale (LOCES).An initial pool of 56 items covering 13 facets of loss-of-control eating was assembled by reviewing qualitative literature, clinical descriptions, and research on binge eating. Eating disorder experts (n = 34) and eating disorder clients (n = 22) rated each proposed item's clarity and relevance to the construct of loss-of-control eating, rated 13 facets for their relevance to the construct, and provided open-ended feedback about the items and facets. Based on the experts' and clients' quantitative and qualitative feedback, scale items were clarified, 28 items were added, and 10 were deleted. University students (n = 476; 70% female, mean age = 20.4 years) completed the resulting 74-item questionnaire, rating how often they had the experience identified in the item while eating in the last 4 weeks. They also completed the measures of eating disturbance, general distress, functional impairment, and general self-control.The resulting 24-item LOCES (Cronbach's α = .96) retained items with highest item-total correlations and coverage of the 12 construct facets that experts rated as important. The LOCES was significantly correlated with eating disturbances, general distress, functional impairment, and general self-control. Three subfactors were identified: behavioral, cognitive/dissociative, and positive/euphoric aspects of loss-of-control eating. A brief, seven-item version of the LOCES was developed and validated.A thorough process of development, content validation, and psychometric evaluation in multiple samples yielded the multifaceted LOCES and its brief form. These instruments may be useful in assessing loss-of-control eating in both clinical and nonclinical settings.

Stigmatizing attitudes towards eating disorders negatively impacts treatment seeking. To determine the effect of interventions to reduce stigma, a measure of stigma that is simple to implement is required. This study aimed to develop a measure of stigmatizing attitudes and beliefs towards bulimia nervosa (SAB-BN) and evaluate the distribution of beliefs across gender, age, education, and income groups.Participants were 1828 community adults (890 men; 938 women) aged 18-65 sampled from the Australian Electoral Roll responded to a mailed questionnaire. Participants provided demographic information and completed the SAB-BN questionnaire.Five components of stigmatizing attitudes and beliefs were identified; advantages of BN, minimization/low seriousness, unreliability, social distance, and personal responsibility. Stigma was low except on social distance and personal responsibility sub-scales, which indicated negative attitudes toward people with bulimia. Men compared with women and lower compared with higher education and income groups held significantly higher stigmatizing attitudes and beliefs. There were few differences between age groups in stigma. Differences between demographic groups provides evidence for known-groups validity.The SAB-BN questionnaire provides a potentially useful tool for evaluating stigma in relation to BN. Results provide insight into components of stigma and the demographic groups to whom interventions should be targeted.

SYNOPSISThree hundred and forty-three eating disorder patients (50% anorexia nervosa, 37% bulimia and 13 % atypical eating disorder) were seen by the eating disorder service in the Wellington (New Zealand) region between 1977 and 1986. Ninety-six per cent were female. Annual rate of referral for anorexia nervosa remained stable at 5 per 100000 population (34 per 100000 females aged 15–29 years). Annual referral rate for bulimia increased from 6 to 44 per 100000 females aged 15–29 years.

Bulimia nervosa (BN) and related eating disorders such as binge eating disorder are common. General practitioners can play a key role in the identification and management of BN and related eating disorders.This article describes the presenting and associated features of BN and overviews evidence based treatment approaches.Key features are recurrent episodes of binge eating, extreme weight control behaviours and over concern about weight and shape issues. By definition people are not underweight. Risk factors include being from a western culture, obesity, exposure to a restrictive dieting environment and low self esteem. People are more likely to present asking for help in weight control or a physical problem secondary to the eating disorder. Evidenced based therapies with good outcomes in current use are cognitive behaviour therapy (in full or guided self help forms), high dose fluoxetine, and interpersonal psychotherapy. It is important to convey optimism about treatment efficacy and outcomes.

Up to 1% of young women may have bulimia nervosa, characterised by an intense preoccupation with body weight, uncontrolled binge-eating episodes, and use of extreme measures to counteract the feared effects of overeating. People with bulimia nervosa may be of normal weight, making it difficult to diagnose. After ten years, about half of people with bulimia nervosa will have recovered fully, a third will have made a partial recovery, and 10-20% will still have symptoms.We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for bulimia nervosa in adults? What are the effects of discontinuing treatment in people with bulimia nervosa in remission? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to June 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).We found 26 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: cognitive behavioural therapy (alone or plus exposure response prevention enhancement); cognitive orientation therapy; dialectical behavioural therapy; discontinuing fluoxetine in people with remission; guided self-help cognitive behavioural therapy; hypnobehavioural therapy; interpersonal psychotherapy; mirtazapine; monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs); motivational enhancement therapy; pharmacotherapy plus psychotherapy; pure or unguided self-help cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT); reboxetine; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs); topiramate; tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs); and venlafaxine.

There are few prospective comprehensive controlled studies of the neuropsychiatric outcome in people who attempt suicide with carbon monoxide (CO). The present study aimed to evaluate this.A consecutive series of 41 adults (81% men) with CO exposure presenting over 3 years, and 20 matched controls, were evaluated with instruments to assess orientation, attention, concentration, speed of information processing, verbal memory, premorbid intellect, executive function (working memory, verbal fluency and set-switching), mood disorder, psychotic disorder, alcohol dependence and obsessive-compulsive disorder, levels of depression, hopelessness, suicide intent, anxiety, neurobehavioural function and social and interpersonal functioning. At 2 months follow-up, the neuropsychological battery was extended to include further tests of executive function (including problem-solving) and memory (including visual memory),At initial assessment, control subjects showed similar levels of cognitive impairment as CO-exposed subjects (except in the case of four CO subjects with very severe impairment), but were more depressed. At 2-months follow-up, the trends were generally towards improvement in all subjects, with no between-group differences.Indirect effects on cognitive state may be at least as great as direct CO neurotoxicity in suicide attempters. The study did not support CO exposure exacerbating mood disorder in this sample.