Robinson Paul, Serfaty Marc
Russell Unit, Barnet Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust, UK.
Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2008 Mar;16(2):84-93. doi: 10.1002/erv.818.
One hundred and ten people in an university population responded to emailed eating disorder questionnaires. Ninty-seven fulfilling criteria for eating disorders (bulimia nervosa (BN), binge eating disorder (BED), EDNOS) were randomised to therapist administered email bulimia therapy (eBT), unsupported Self directed writing (SDW) or Waiting list control (WLC). Measures were repeated at 3 months. Diagnosis, Beck depression inventory (BDI) and Bulimia investigatory test (BITE) scores were recorded. Follow-up rate was 63% and results must be interpreted cautiously. However significantly fewer participants who had received eBT or SDW fulfilled criteria for eating disorders at follow up compared to WLC. There was no significant difference between eBT and SDW in the analysis of variance (ANOVA), although in separate analyses, eBT was significantly superior to WLC (p < 0.02) and the difference for SDW approached significance (p = 0.06). BDI and BITE scores showed no significant change. For eBT participants there was a significant positive correlation between words written and improvement in BITE severity score. BN, BED and EDNOS can be treated via email.
一所大学的110人回复了通过电子邮件发送的饮食失调问卷。97名符合饮食失调标准（神经性贪食症（BN）、暴饮暴食症（BED）、未特定的进食障碍（EDNOS））的人被随机分配到由治疗师实施的电子邮件暴食疗法（eBT）、无支持的自我指导写作（SDW）或等待名单对照组（WLC）。在3个月时重复进行测量。记录诊断结果、贝克抑郁量表（BDI）和贪食症调查测试（BITE）得分。随访率为63%，结果必须谨慎解读。然而，与WLC相比，接受eBT或SDW的参与者在随访时符合饮食失调标准的人数明显减少。在方差分析（ANOVA）中，eBT和SDW之间没有显著差异，尽管在单独分析中，eBT明显优于WLC（p < 0.02），SDW的差异接近显著水平（p = 0.06）。BDI和BITE得分没有显著变化。对于接受eBT的参与者，书写的字数与BITE严重程度得分的改善之间存在显著正相关。BN、BED和EDNOS可以通过电子邮件进行治疗。
