Search

Assessing clinically meaningful change is valuable for treatment planning, monitoring course of illness and evaluating outcome. Although DSM eating disorder (ED) diagnoses have been criticized for poor clinical utility, instability, and uncertainty, remission/change of diagnosis is often the standard for evaluating outcome. We tested the validity of the clinically significant reliable change index (CS/RCI) compared to change in DSM-IV ED-diagnoses. We investigated if CS/RCI was concordant to diagnostic change and compared explained variance on measures at follow-up. Using a database for specialized ED treatment in Sweden the sample contained 1042 female patients (246 adolescents/796 adults). CS/RCI was calculated for the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA) and the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q). CS/RCI explained more variance in gain scores for psychopathology measures than diagnostic change (DSM-IV). Average agreement between diagnostic change and CS/RCI was 62% and 60% for CIA and EDE-Q, respectively. Diagnostic change always resulted in more positive outcome than CS/RCI. Together with clinical judgment, CS/RCI is a valuable method for determining clinically significant changes in clinical practice and research. It is economically sound and results are easily interpreted and communicated to patients., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: DSM-IV eating disorder (ED) diagnoses have been criticized for lack of clinical utility, diagnostic instability, and over-inclusiveness of the residual category "ED not otherwise specified" (EDNOS). Revisions made in DSM-5 attempt to generate a more scientifically valid and clinically relevant system of ED classification. The aim with the present study was to examine clinical characteristics and distinctiveness of the new DSM-5 ED diagnoses, especially concerning purging disorder (PD)., Methods: Using a large naturalistic Swedish ED database, 2233 adult women were diagnosed using DSM-5. Initial and 1-year follow-up psychopathology data were analyzed. Measures included the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire, Structural Eating Disorder Interview, Clinical Impairment Assessment, Structural Analysis of Social Behavior, Comprehensive Psychiatric Rating Scale, and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders., Results: Few meaningful differences emerged between anorexia nervosa binge/purge subtype (ANB/P), PD, and bulimia nervosa (BN). Unspecified Feeding and Eating Disorders (UFED) showed significantly less severity compared to other groups., Conclusions: PD does not appear to constitute a distinct diagnosis, the distinction between atypical AN and PD requires clarification, and minimum inclusion criteria for UFED are needed. Further sub-classification is unlikely to improve clinical utility. Instead, better delineation of commonalities is important.