Reas Deborah L, Grilo Carlos M
Regional Department for Eating Disorders, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Clin Ther. 2021 Jan;43(1):17-39. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2020.10.006. Epub 2020 Dec 18.
Eating disorders are prevalent public health problems associated with broad psychosocial impairments and with elevated rates of psychiatric and medical comorbidities. Critical reviews of the treatment literature for eating disorders indicate that although certain specialized psychological treatments and specific medications show efficacy to varying degrees across the different eating disorders, many patients fail to derive sufficient benefit from existing treatments. This article addresses whether combining psychological and pharmacologic interventions confers any additional benefits for treating eating disorders.
This study was a critical review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing combined psychological and pharmacologic treatment approaches for eating disorders with a focus on anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge-eating disorder (BED).
For AN, 3 of the 4 RCTs reported no significant advantage for combining treatments; the fourth reported a statistically significant, albeit clinically modest, advantage. For BN, 10 of the 12 RCTs reported no significant advantage for combining treatments; 2 RCTs found that combining fluoxetine with specific psychological treatments enhanced outcomes relative to medication only but not relative to the psychological treatments only. For BED, of the 12 RCTs, only 2 (both with antiseizure medications) significantly enhanced both binge-eating and weight outcomes, and only 2 (with orlistat, a weight-loss medication) enhanced weight loss but not binge-eating outcomes.
Despite the public health significance of eating disorders, the scope of research performed on the utility of combining treatments is limited. To date, the few RCTs testing combined pharmacologic plus psychological treatments for eating disorders have yielded mostly nonsignificant findings. Future RCTs should focus on testing additive benefits of medications with relevant mechanisms of action to available effective psychological interventions. In addition, future RCTs that test additive effects should use adaptive designs, which could inform treatment algorithms to enhance outcomes among both responders and nonresponders to initial interventions.
饮食失调是普遍存在的公共卫生问题,与广泛的心理社会功能损害以及较高的精神和医学共病率相关。对饮食失调治疗文献的批判性综述表明,尽管某些专门的心理治疗和特定药物在不同的饮食失调中显示出不同程度的疗效,但许多患者未能从现有治疗中获得足够的益处。本文探讨联合心理和药物干预对治疗饮食失调是否有额外益处。
本研究是对测试联合心理和药物治疗方法治疗饮食失调的随机对照试验(RCT)的批判性综述,重点关注神经性厌食症(AN)、神经性贪食症(BN)和暴饮暴食症(BED)。
对于AN,4项RCT中有3项报告联合治疗无显著优势;第四项报告了统计学上显著的优势,尽管在临床上并不明显。对于BN,12项RCT中有10项报告联合治疗无显著优势;2项RCT发现,将氟西汀与特定心理治疗相结合相对于仅用药可改善结局,但相对于仅进行心理治疗并无改善。对于BED,在12项RCT中,只有2项(均使用抗癫痫药物)显著改善了暴饮暴食和体重结局,只有2项(使用减肥药物奥利司他)改善了体重减轻但未改善暴饮暴食结局。
尽管饮食失调具有公共卫生意义,但关于联合治疗效用的研究范围有限。迄今为止,少数测试联合药物和心理治疗饮食失调的RCT大多得出无显著结果。未来的RCT应侧重于测试具有相关作用机制的药物与现有有效心理干预措施的附加益处。此外,未来测试附加效应的RCT应采用适应性设计,这可为治疗算法提供信息,以改善初始干预的反应者和无反应者的结局。