Adapting Barlow's Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Overweight Adults: A Nonrandomized Controlled Feasibility Study.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Leonor P Gawron, Kevin Rodríguez Clifford, Alba Ramírez Guillén, Mar Carceller-Sindreu, Cristina Carmona Farrés, Caterina Del Mar Bonnin, Maria J Portella
{"title":"Adapting Barlow's Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Overweight Adults: A Nonrandomized Controlled Feasibility Study.","authors":"Leonor P Gawron, Kevin Rodríguez Clifford, Alba Ramírez Guillén, Mar Carceller-Sindreu, Cristina Carmona Farrés, Caterina Del Mar Bonnin, Maria J Portella","doi":"10.1002/eat.24474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of the Unified Protocol for Emotional Eating (UP-EE) in a group format.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Fifty-seven participants exhibiting high to severe emotional eating (EE) were assigned to an 8-week group intervention or to a control group receiving treatment as usual (TAU). EE (measured with the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire) was the primary outcome, while state anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory [STAI-S]), depression (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI-II]) and perceived stress (Perceived Stress Scale [PSS-14]) were the secondary measures, assessed at baseline and post-intervention, or 8 weeks later in the control group. Satisfaction was measured via the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8). Effectiveness was estimated using a linear mixed-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The UP-EE received positive feedback and achieved an acceptable treatment retention. There were no significant differences regarding sociodemographic and clinical characteristics between groups. While both groups were not significantly different at the end of the intervention, the waitlist group worsened in anxiety, depression, and perceived stress, and showed only a slight improvement in EE. In contrast, the intervention group showed significant improvements across these variables, with a sharper decrease in EE. Results were consistent across both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A group UP-EE intervention is a feasible intervention. Future research should focus on a larger sample with a randomized controlled trial design and utilize measures of disordered eating to more clearly identify the superiority of the intervention over a comparison condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":51067,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Eating Disorders","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-26","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.24474","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: To evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of the Unified Protocol for Emotional Eating (UP-EE) in a group format.

Method: Fifty-seven participants exhibiting high to severe emotional eating (EE) were assigned to an 8-week group intervention or to a control group receiving treatment as usual (TAU). EE (measured with the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire) was the primary outcome, while state anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory [STAI-S]), depression (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI-II]) and perceived stress (Perceived Stress Scale [PSS-14]) were the secondary measures, assessed at baseline and post-intervention, or 8 weeks later in the control group. Satisfaction was measured via the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8). Effectiveness was estimated using a linear mixed-effects model.

Results: The UP-EE received positive feedback and achieved an acceptable treatment retention. There were no significant differences regarding sociodemographic and clinical characteristics between groups. While both groups were not significantly different at the end of the intervention, the waitlist group worsened in anxiety, depression, and perceived stress, and showed only a slight improvement in EE. In contrast, the intervention group showed significant improvements across these variables, with a sharper decrease in EE. Results were consistent across both per-protocol and intention-to-treat analyses.

Conclusions: A group UP-EE intervention is a feasible intervention. Future research should focus on a larger sample with a randomized controlled trial design and utilize measures of disordered eating to more clearly identify the superiority of the intervention over a comparison condition.

采用Barlow统一方案对超重成人的情绪障碍进行跨诊断治疗:一项非随机对照可行性研究。
目的:评价情绪进食统一方案(UP-EE)的可行性和潜在有效性。方法:57名表现出高至重度情绪进食(EE)的参与者被分配到8周的小组干预或对照组接受常规治疗(TAU)。情感表达(用荷兰饮食行为问卷测量)是主要指标,而状态焦虑(状态-特质焦虑量表[STAI-S])、抑郁(贝克抑郁量表[BDI-II])和感知压力(感知压力量表[PSS-14])是次要指标,分别在基线和干预后或8周后在对照组进行评估。满意度通过客户满意度问卷(CSQ-8)进行测量。使用线性混合效应模型估计有效性。结果:UP-EE获得了积极的反馈,并取得了可接受的治疗保留。两组间在社会人口学和临床特征方面无显著差异。虽然两组在干预结束时没有显着差异,但等候名单组在焦虑,抑郁和感知压力方面恶化,并且在情感表达方面仅略有改善。相比之下,干预组在这些变量上表现出显著的改善,情感表达的下降幅度更大。每个方案和意向治疗分析的结果一致。结论:团体UP-EE干预是一种可行的干预措施。未来的研究应该集中在更大的随机对照试验设计的样本上,并利用饮食失调的测量来更清楚地确定干预比比较条件的优越性。
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