A US-Based Consensus on Diagnostic Overlap and Distinction for Pediatric Feeding Disorder and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Hayley H Estrem, Jaclyn L Pederson, Pamela Dodrill, Cuyler Romeo, Kelsey Thompson, Jennifer J Thomas, Nancy Zucker, Richard Noel, Hana Zickgraf, Jessie Menzel, Colleen T Lukens, Praveen S Goday, Sarah MacLaughlin, William G Sharp
{"title":"A US-Based Consensus on Diagnostic Overlap and Distinction for Pediatric Feeding Disorder and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder.","authors":"Hayley H Estrem, Jaclyn L Pederson, Pamela Dodrill, Cuyler Romeo, Kelsey Thompson, Jennifer J Thomas, Nancy Zucker, Richard Noel, Hana Zickgraf, Jessie Menzel, Colleen T Lukens, Praveen S Goday, Sarah MacLaughlin, William G Sharp","doi":"10.1002/eat.24349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>As diagnoses covering dysfunctional feeding and eating in pediatrics, avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) and pediatric feeding disorder (PFD) contain inherent areas of overlap in their diagnostic criteria. Areas of overlap include criteria regarding nutritional consequences associated with feeding/eating dysfunction and shared emphasis on possible psychosocial impairment associated with restricted food intake. Complicating the differential diagnosis process is a lack of guidance regarding when the two conditions occur independently, co-qualify, and/or transition into the other. Feeding Matters' Research Initiatives Task Force planned and hosted a PFD-ARFID consensus meeting, with the aim of reaching a consensus regarding diagnostic clarity on PFD and ARFID.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Criteria for participation focused on US residents who either: (a) served as an author on the ARFID workgroup or PFD consensus papers, or (b) provided community representation via board or committee roles. The consensus process followed three stages: prework, the meeting, and post-work/writing. Twelve participants were present for the meeting, with 14 involved in pre- and post-work/writing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final panel included four psychologists representing the ARFID community and seven multidisciplinary members representing PFD's four domains (medical, nutrition, skill, and psychosocial) plus a Zero-to-Three community representative and two representatives from Feeding Matters. Results yielded 10 consensus statements and visuals to support the consensus statements.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The consensus process and results underscore an ongoing need to improve diagnostic systems and reinforce calls for strengthening healthcare expertise for both PFD and ARFID. Community-based participatory research is recommended to advance both diagnoses and reduce ambiguity in practice settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":51067,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.24349","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: As diagnoses covering dysfunctional feeding and eating in pediatrics, avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) and pediatric feeding disorder (PFD) contain inherent areas of overlap in their diagnostic criteria. Areas of overlap include criteria regarding nutritional consequences associated with feeding/eating dysfunction and shared emphasis on possible psychosocial impairment associated with restricted food intake. Complicating the differential diagnosis process is a lack of guidance regarding when the two conditions occur independently, co-qualify, and/or transition into the other. Feeding Matters' Research Initiatives Task Force planned and hosted a PFD-ARFID consensus meeting, with the aim of reaching a consensus regarding diagnostic clarity on PFD and ARFID.

Method: Criteria for participation focused on US residents who either: (a) served as an author on the ARFID workgroup or PFD consensus papers, or (b) provided community representation via board or committee roles. The consensus process followed three stages: prework, the meeting, and post-work/writing. Twelve participants were present for the meeting, with 14 involved in pre- and post-work/writing.

Results: The final panel included four psychologists representing the ARFID community and seven multidisciplinary members representing PFD's four domains (medical, nutrition, skill, and psychosocial) plus a Zero-to-Three community representative and two representatives from Feeding Matters. Results yielded 10 consensus statements and visuals to support the consensus statements.

Discussion: The consensus process and results underscore an ongoing need to improve diagnostic systems and reinforce calls for strengthening healthcare expertise for both PFD and ARFID. Community-based participatory research is recommended to advance both diagnoses and reduce ambiguity in practice settings.

基于美国的小儿喂养障碍和避免/限制性食物摄入障碍诊断重叠和区分共识。
目的:避免/限制性食物摄入障碍(ARFID)和儿科喂养障碍(PFD)作为儿科喂养和进食功能障碍的诊断,其诊断标准存在固有的重叠之处。重叠之处包括与喂养/进食功能障碍相关的营养后果标准,以及共同强调与限制性食物摄入相关的可能的社会心理损害。使鉴别诊断过程复杂化的是,缺乏关于这两种病症何时独立出现、何时共同出现和/或何时过渡到另一种病症的指导。Feeding Matters 的研究倡议工作组计划并主办了一次 PFD-ARFID 共识会议,旨在就 PFD 和 ARFID 的诊断明确性达成共识:参会标准主要针对美国居民,他们必须是:(a) ARFID 工作组或 PFD 共识文件的作者,或 (b) 通过董事会或委员会角色提供社区代表。共识过程分为三个阶段:前期工作、会议和后期工作/撰写。12 人参加了会议,14 人参与了前期和后期工作/撰写:最终小组成员包括四名代表 ARFID 社区的心理学家和七名代表 PFD 四个领域(医疗、营养、技能和社会心理)的多学科成员,以及一名零到三岁儿童社区代表和两名喂养事宜组织的代表。结果产生了 10 项共识声明和支持共识声明的视觉效果:讨论:达成共识的过程和结果突显了不断改进诊断系统的必要性,并进一步呼吁加强针对 PFD 和 ARFID 的医疗保健专业知识。建议开展以社区为基础的参与式研究,以促进这两种诊断并减少实践环境中的模糊性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
204
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Articles featured in the journal describe state-of-the-art scientific research on theory, methodology, etiology, clinical practice, and policy related to eating disorders, as well as contributions that facilitate scholarly critique and discussion of science and practice in the field. Theoretical and empirical work on obesity or healthy eating falls within the journal’s scope inasmuch as it facilitates the advancement of efforts to describe and understand, prevent, or treat eating disorders. IJED welcomes submissions from all regions of the world and representing all levels of inquiry (including basic science, clinical trials, implementation research, and dissemination studies), and across a full range of scientific methods, disciplines, and approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信