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