{"title":"非典型神经性厌食症的棘手问题:临床医生对如何定义厌食症的看法。","authors":"Jessica Beard, Glenn Waller","doi":"10.1002/erv.3152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Atypical Anorexia Nervosa (AAN) is an ill-defined diagnosis. Little is known about how eating disorder clinicians perceive the utility of the diagnosis, and what changes they believe would add to that utility. This qualitative study aimed to explore clinicians' perspectives on refining the DSM-5 AAN diagnosis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Content analysis of text was used to categorise 47 responses to the questions: “What changes are required to the DSM-5 definition of AAN?”, and “How do you think significant weight loss should be defined?”.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Over 27% of clinicians advocated removing the AAN diagnosis or combining it with Anorexia Nervosa, while nearly 15% reported concerns about the requirement for ‘significant weight loss’. Over 87% of clinicians suggested ways (often inconsistent across clinicians) to define ‘significant weight loss’, with emphasis on the need for a specified rate (i.e., amount of loss/time) and consideration of physical health impacts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Clinicians broadly agree that revisions are necessary to the current AAN definition. However, while some propose specific modifications (e.g., defining ‘significant weight loss’), others advocate for the complete removal of the diagnosis. The breadth of suggestions for how to define ‘significant weight loss’ highlights the ongoing lack of consensus on AAN's relevance as a diagnostic entity.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48117,"journal":{"name":"European Eating Disorders Review","volume":"33 2","pages":"426-433"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11786928/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Thorny Issue of Atypical Anorexia Nervosa: Clinicians' Perspectives on How It Should Be Defined\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Beard, Glenn Waller\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/erv.3152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>Atypical Anorexia Nervosa (AAN) is an ill-defined diagnosis. Little is known about how eating disorder clinicians perceive the utility of the diagnosis, and what changes they believe would add to that utility. This qualitative study aimed to explore clinicians' perspectives on refining the DSM-5 AAN diagnosis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Content analysis of text was used to categorise 47 responses to the questions: “What changes are required to the DSM-5 definition of AAN?”, and “How do you think significant weight loss should be defined?”.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Over 27% of clinicians advocated removing the AAN diagnosis or combining it with Anorexia Nervosa, while nearly 15% reported concerns about the requirement for ‘significant weight loss’. Over 87% of clinicians suggested ways (often inconsistent across clinicians) to define ‘significant weight loss’, with emphasis on the need for a specified rate (i.e., amount of loss/time) and consideration of physical health impacts.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Clinicians broadly agree that revisions are necessary to the current AAN definition. However, while some propose specific modifications (e.g., defining ‘significant weight loss’), others advocate for the complete removal of the diagnosis. The breadth of suggestions for how to define ‘significant weight loss’ highlights the ongoing lack of consensus on AAN's relevance as a diagnostic entity.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48117,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Eating Disorders Review\",\"volume\":\"33 2\",\"pages\":\"426-433\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11786928/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Eating Disorders Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/erv.3152\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Eating Disorders Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/erv.3152","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:非典型神经性厌食症(AAN)是一种定义不清的诊断。关于进食障碍临床医生如何看待该诊断的实用性,以及他们认为哪些改变会增加该诊断的实用性,人们知之甚少。本定性研究旨在探讨临床医生对完善 DSM-5 AAN 诊断的看法:方法:采用文本内容分析法对 47 个问题的回答进行分类:"结果:超过27%的临床医生主张对DSM-5中AAN的定义进行修改:结果:超过 27% 的临床医生主张取消 AAN 诊断或将其与神经性厌食症合并,近 15% 的临床医生对 "体重明显减轻 "的要求表示担忧。超过 87% 的临床医生提出了界定 "体重显著下降 "的方法(不同临床医生的方法往往不一致),强调需要有一个特定的比率(即下降量/时间)并考虑对身体健康的影响:临床医生普遍认为有必要对当前的 AAN 定义进行修订。结论:临床医生普遍认为有必要对当前的 AAN 定义进行修订。然而,虽然有些医生提出了具体的修改建议(例如,定义 "体重明显减轻"),但另一些医生则主张完全取消该诊断。关于如何定义 "体重明显减轻 "的建议范围之广,凸显了人们对 AAN 作为诊断实体的相关性一直缺乏共识。
The Thorny Issue of Atypical Anorexia Nervosa: Clinicians' Perspectives on How It Should Be Defined
Objective
Atypical Anorexia Nervosa (AAN) is an ill-defined diagnosis. Little is known about how eating disorder clinicians perceive the utility of the diagnosis, and what changes they believe would add to that utility. This qualitative study aimed to explore clinicians' perspectives on refining the DSM-5 AAN diagnosis.
Methods
Content analysis of text was used to categorise 47 responses to the questions: “What changes are required to the DSM-5 definition of AAN?”, and “How do you think significant weight loss should be defined?”.
Results
Over 27% of clinicians advocated removing the AAN diagnosis or combining it with Anorexia Nervosa, while nearly 15% reported concerns about the requirement for ‘significant weight loss’. Over 87% of clinicians suggested ways (often inconsistent across clinicians) to define ‘significant weight loss’, with emphasis on the need for a specified rate (i.e., amount of loss/time) and consideration of physical health impacts.
Conclusion
Clinicians broadly agree that revisions are necessary to the current AAN definition. However, while some propose specific modifications (e.g., defining ‘significant weight loss’), others advocate for the complete removal of the diagnosis. The breadth of suggestions for how to define ‘significant weight loss’ highlights the ongoing lack of consensus on AAN's relevance as a diagnostic entity.
期刊介绍:
European Eating Disorders Review publishes authoritative and accessible articles, from all over the world, which review or report original research that has implications for the treatment and care of people with eating disorders, and articles which report innovations and experience in the clinical management of eating disorders. The journal focuses on implications for best practice in diagnosis and treatment. The journal also provides a forum for discussion of the causes and prevention of eating disorders, and related health policy. The aims of the journal are to offer a channel of communication between researchers, practitioners, administrators and policymakers who need to report and understand developments in the field of eating disorders.