Feedback versus no feedback in improving patient outcome in group psychotherapy for eating disorders (F-EAT): protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Annika Helgadóttir Davidsen, Stig Poulsen, Mette Waaddegaard, Jane Lindschou, Marianne Lau, Annika Helgadóttir Davidsen, Stig Poulsen, Mette Waaddegaard, Jane Lindschou, Marianne Lau

Abstract

Background: Continuous feedback on patient improvement and the therapeutic alliance may reduce the number of dropouts and increase patient outcome. There are, however, only three published randomized trials on the effect of feedback on the treatment of eating disorders, showing inconclusive results, and there are no randomized trials on the effect of feedback in group therapy. Accordingly the current randomized clinical trial, initiated in September 2012 at the outpatient clinic for eating disorders at Stolpegaard Psychotherapy Centre, aims to investigate the impact of continuous feedback on attendance and outcome in group psychotherapy.

Methods/design: The hypothesis is that continuous feedback to both patient and therapist on treatment progress and alliance will increase attendance and treatment outcome. The trial is set up using a randomized design with a minimum of 128 patients allocated to either an experimental or control group at a ratio of 1:1. The experimental group will receive standard treatment (systemic and narrative group psychotherapy) with feedback intervention, whereas the control group will receive standard treatment only. The participants are diagnosed with bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder, or an eating disorder not otherwise specified, according to the DSM-IV. In the experimental group feedback to the participants, based on the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and the Group Session Rating Scale (GSRS), is actively added to standard treatment. The ORS assesses areas of life functioning known to change as a result of therapeutic intervention. The GSRS assesses key dimensions of effective therapeutic relationships. In the control group, the patients fill out the Outcome Rating Scale only, and feedback is not provided.The primary outcome is the rate of attendance to treatment sessions. The secondary outcome is the severity of eating disorder symptoms. Exploratory outcomes are the level of psychological and social functioning, and suicide or self-harm. This is measured with the ORS, Symptom Check List, WHO-Five Wellbeing Index, Sheehan Disability Scale and a modified version of the Self-Harm Inventory.

Discussion: If the results will confirm the hypothesis, this trial will support feedback as a way to improve group treatment attendance for outpatients with eating disorders.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01693237.

References

    1. Waaddegaard M. Risk behaviour for developing eating disorders among Danish women [Danish: Risikoadfærd For Udvikling Af Spiseforstyrrelser Blandt Danske Kvinder] Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen; 2002.
    1. Sundhedsstyrelsen, Health DNBo. Eating disorders. recommendations for organisation and treatment [Danish: Spiseforstyrrelser. Anbefalinger for organisation og behandling] Copenhagen: The Danish National Board of Health; 2005. p. 1.0.
    1. APA. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
    1. American Psychiatric Association DSM-5 Development. [ ]
    1. Swift JK, Greenberg RP. Premature discontinuation in adult psychotherapy: a meta-analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2012;80:547–559.
    1. Yalom ID, Leszcz M. The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. 5. New York: Basic Books; 2005.
    1. Montoya ID, Schroeder JR, Preston KL, Covi L, Umbricht A, Contoreggi C, Fudala PJ, Johnson RE, Gorelick DA. Influence of psychotherapy attendance on buprenorphine treatment outcome. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2005;28:247–254. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2005.01.004.
    1. Page AC, Hooke GR. Best practices: increased attendance in inpatient group psychotherapy improves patient outcomes. Psychiatr Serv. 2009;60:426–428.
    1. Reardon ML, Cukrowicz KC, Reeves MD, Joiner TE. Duration and regularity of therapy attendance as predictors of treatment outcome in an adult outpatient population. Psychother Res. 2002;12:273–285. doi: 10.1080/713664390.
    1. Howard KI, Moras K, Brill PL, Martinovich Z, Lutz W. Evaluation of psychotherapy: efficacy, effectiveness, and patient progress. Am Psychol. 1996;51:1059–1064.
    1. Lambert M, Shimokawa K. In: Psychotherapy relationships that work. Norcross JC, editor. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011. Collecting client feedback; pp. 203–223.
    1. Green D, Latchford G. Maximising the benefits of psychotherapy. Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester; 2012.
    1. Castonguay L, Barkham M, Lutz W, McAleavey A. In: Bergin and Garfield’s Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior Change. 6. Lambert M, editor. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. Practice-oriented research: approaches and applications.
    1. OQ Measures. [ ]
    1. Lambert MJ, Hansen NB, Finch AE. Patient-focused research: using patient outcome data to enhance treatment effects. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2001;69:159–72.
    1. Hubble MA, Duncan BL, Miller SD. The heart and soul of change: what works in therapy. 1. Washington DC: American Psychological Association; 1999.
    1. Bargmann S, Robinson B. Manual 2. Feedback-informed clinical work: the basics. the ICCE manuals on feedback-informed treatment (FIT) Chicago: International Center for Clinical Excellence; 2012.
    1. Bertolino B, Bargmann S, Miller SD. Manual 1. What works in therapy: a primer. the ICCE manuals on feedback-informed treatment (FIT) Chicago: International Center for Clinical Excellence; 2012.
    1. Duncan BL, Miller SD, Sparks JA. The heroic client: a revolutionary way to improve effectiveness through client-directed, outcome-informed therapy (Rev. Ed.) San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass; 2004. p. 266.
    1. The ICCE manuals on FIT. Chicago International Center for Clinical Excellence; 2012.
    1. NREPP. SAMHSA’s National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices. [ ]
    1. Sapyta J, Riemer M, Bickman L. Feedback to clinicians: theory, research, and practice. J Clin Psychol. 2005;61:145–53. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20107.
    1. Knaup C, Koesters M, Schoefer D, Becker T, Puschner B. Effect of feedback of treatment outcome in specialist mental healthcare: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry. 2009;195:15–22. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.108.053967.
    1. Schmidt U, Landau S, Pombo-Carril MG, Bara-Carril N, Reid Y, Murray K, Treasure J, Katzman M. Does personalized feedback improve the outcome of cognitive-behavioral guided self-care in bulimia nervosa? A preliminary randomized controlled trial. Br J Clin Psychol. 2006;45:111–21. doi: 10.1348/014466505X29143.
    1. Simon W, Lambert MJ, Busath G, Vazquez A, Berkeljon A, Hyer K, Granley M, Berrett M. Effects of providing patient progress feedback and clinical support tools to psychotherapists in an inpatient eating disorders treatment program: a randomized controlled study. Psychother res. 2013;23:287–300. doi: 10.1080/10503307.2013.787497.
    1. Truitt KG. Modeling treatment outcomes in eating disorders. California: Loma Linda University; 2011.
    1. Nock MKJ IB, Wedig MM. In: Evidence-Based Outcome Research. Nezu AMN CM, editor. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008. Research Designs; pp. 201–18.
    1. Andersen T. The reflecting team: dialogues and dialogues about the dialogues. New York: WW Norton & Co.; 1991.
    1. Mental Health Services CRoD: Standardized treatment for eating disorders [Danish: Pakkeforløb For Spiseforstyrrelser] [ ]
    1. White J, Epston D. Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New York: Norton; 1990.
    1. Weingarten K. The small and the ordinary: the daily practice of a postmodern narrative Therapy. Fam Process. 1998;37:3–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1998.00003.x.
    1. Rasmussen SA. In: Eating disorders illustrated clinically and culturally [Danish: Frås og faste Spiseforstyrrelser i klinisk og kulturel belysning] Lunn S, Rokkedal K, Rosenbaum B, editor. Copenhagen: Danish Psychological publishers; 2010. Systemic and narrative family theory [Danish: Systemisk Og Narrativ Familieteori]
    1. Rasmussen SA. In: Eating disorders illustrated clinically and culturally [Danish: Frås Og Faste Spiseforstyrrelser I Klinisk Og Kulturel Belysning] Lunn S, Rokkedal K, Rosenbaum B, editor. Copenhagen: Danish Psychological publishers; 2010. Systemic and narrative family therapy [Danish: Systemisk og narrativ familiebehandling]
    1. Asylums GE. Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. New York: Doubleday; 1961.
    1. von Sydow K, Beher S, Schweitzer J, Retzlaff R. The efficacy of systemic therapy with adult patients: a meta-content analysis of 38 randomized controlled trials. Fam Process. 2010;49:457–85. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.2010.01334.x.
    1. Plambech B, Lau M, Christensen G. In: Eating disorders. An interdisciplinary anthology [Danish: Spiseforstyrrelser. En tværfaglig antologi] Andreasen J, Christiansen E, editor. Copenhagen: Frydenlund publishers; 2000. The Stolpegaard Model - a treatment option [Danish: Stolpegårdmodellen - et behandlingstilbud] pp. 343–65.
    1. FIT-Outcomes: Feedback Informed Treatment. [ ]
    1. Fairburn CG, Cooper Z. In: Binge eating: nature, assessment and treatment. Fairburn CG, Wilson GT, editor. New York: Guilford Press; 1993. The eating disorder examination (12th edition) pp. 317–60.
    1. Sheehan D, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, Hergueta T, Baker R, Dunbar G. The mini-international neuropsychiatric interview (MINI.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59:22–33.
    1. Moran P, Leese M, Lee T, Walters P, Thornicroft G, Mann A. Standardised assessment of personality - abbreviated scale (SAPAS): preliminary validation of a brief screen for personality disorder. Br J Psychiatry. 2003;183:228–32. doi: 10.1192/bjp.183.3.228.
    1. Cooper Z, Fairburn CG. The eating disorder examination: a semi-structured interview for the assessment of the specific psychopathology of eating disorders. Int J Eat Disord. 2006;6:1–8.
    1. Fairburn CG, Cooper CJ, O’Connor M. Eating disorder examination interview (Edition 16.0D) Oxford: University of Oxford; 2008. [ ]
    1. Clausen L, Rokkedal K. In: Eating disorders illustrated clinically and culturally [Danish: Frås og faste Spiseforstyrrelser i klinisk og kulturel belysning] Lunn S, Rokkedal K, Rosenbaum B, editor. Viborg: Dansk psykologisk Forlag; 2010. Assessment measures in eating disorders [Danish: Undersøgelsesinstrumenter ved spiseforstyrrelser] pp. 491–505.
    1. Derogatis LR, Lipman RS, Covi L. SCL-90: An outpatient psychiatric rating scale - preliminary report. Psychopharmacol Bull. 1973;9:13–28.
    1. Derogatis LR, Rickels K, Rock AF. The SCL-90 and the MMPI: a step in the validation of a new self-report scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1976;128:280–9. doi: 10.1192/bjp.128.3.280.
    1. Olsen LR, Mortensen EL, Bech P. Prevalence of major depression and stress indicators in the Danish general population. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2004;109:96–103. doi: 10.1046/j.0001-690X.2003.00231.x.
    1. Sheehan DV, Harnett-Sheehan K, Raj BA. The measurement of disability. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 1996;Suppl 3:89–95.
    1. Sheehan KH, Sheehan DV. Assessing treatment effects in clinical trials with the discan metric of the sheehan disability scale. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;23:70–83. doi: 10.1097/YIC.0b013e3282f2b4d6.
    1. Bech P. Measuring the dimensions of psychological general well-being by the WHO-5. Qual life newsl. 2004;32:15–6.
    1. McDowell I. Measures of self-perceived well-being. J Psychosom Res. 2010;69:69–79. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.07.002.
    1. Sansone RA, Sansone LA. Measuring self-harm behavior with the self-harm inventory. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 2010;7:16–20.
    1. Latimer S, Meade T, Tennant A. Measuring engagement in deliberate self-harm behaviours: psychometric evaluation of six scales. BMC psychiatry. 2013;13:4. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-13-4.
    1. Dupont WD, Plummer WD. Power and sample size calculations: a review and computer program. Control Clin Trials. 1990;11:116–28. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(90)90005-M.
    1. Dupont WD, Plummer WD. Power and sample size calculations for studies involving linear regression. Control Clin Trials. 1998;19:589–601. doi: 10.1016/S0197-2456(98)00037-3.
    1. Reese RJ, Toland MD, Slone NC, Norsworthy LA. Effect of client feedback on couple psychotherapy outcomes. Psychother Theory Res Pract Train. 2010;47:616–30.
    1. Fairburn CG, Cooper CJ, Doll HA, O’Connor M, Bohn K, Hawker DM, Wales JA, Palmer RL. Transdiagnostic cognitive-behavioral therapy for patients with eating disorders: a two-site trial with 60-week follow-up. Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166:311–9. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08040608.
    1. Herbert JD, Gaudiano BA, Rheingold AA, Myers VH, Dalrymple K, Nolan EM. Social skills training augments the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral group therapy for social anxiety disorder. Behav Ther. 2005;36:125–38. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80061-9.
    1. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:982–9. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-11-200112040-00010.
    1. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Jüni P, Altman DG, Gluud C, Martin RM, Wood AJG, Sterne JAC. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: Meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008;336:601. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Savovic J, Jones E, Altman DG, Harris RJ, Jünl P, Pildal J, Als_Nielsen B, Balk EM, Gluud C, Gluud LL, Ioannidis JPA, Schulz KF, Beynon R, Welton NJ, Wood L, Moher D, Deeks JJ, Sterne JAC. Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:429–38. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-6-201209180-00537.
    1. Hróbjartsson A, Thomsen ASS, Emanuelsson F, Tendal B, Hilden J, Boutron I, Ravaud P, Brorson S. Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with binary outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors. BMJ. 2012;344:e1119. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e1119.
    1. Buchanan T. Online assessment: desirable or dangerous? Prof Psychol Res Prac. 2002;33:148–54.
    1. Elkjær H, Mortensen EL, Poulsen S, Kristensen E, Lau M. Dis)agreement between therapist and patient evaluation of change achieved during group therapy [Danish: (U)overensstemmelse mellem behandler- og patientvurdering af effekt på gruppeterapi] Matrix. 2012;1:23–38.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться