Anna Lose

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.

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.

Two Year Follow-Up of the MOSAIC Trial

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.

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.

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.

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.

Process Evaluation of the MOSAIC Trial, Part I: Therapist Experiences of Delivering Two Psychological Therapies for Treatment of Anorexia Nervosa: Process Evaluation of the MOSAIC trial: Part I

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, Part 1

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.