Multidisciplinary Eating Disorders Research Collaborative, Mass General Brigham, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Int J Eat Disord. 2024 May;57(5):1260-1267. doi: 10.1002/eat.24126. Epub 2024 Jan 11.
Cognitive-behavioral therapy for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID; CBT-AR) theoretically targets three prototypic motivations (sensory sensitivity, lack of interest/low appetite, fear of aversive consequences), aligned with three modularized interventions. As an exploratory investigation, we: (1) evaluated change in candidate mechanisms in relationship to change in ARFID severity, and (2) tested if assignment (vs. not) to a module resulted in larger improvements in the corresponding mechanism.
Males and females (N = 42; 10-55 years) participated in an open trial of CBT-AR.
Decreases in scaled scores for each candidate mechanism had medium to large correlations with decreases in ARFID severity-sensory sensitivity: -0.7 decrease (r = .42, p = .01); lack of interest/low appetite: -0.3 decrease (r = .60, p < .0001); and fear of aversive consequences: -1.1 decrease (r = .33, p = .05). Linear mixed models revealed significant weekly improvements for each candidate mechanism across the full sample (ps < .0001). There were significant interactions for the sensory and fear of aversive consequences modules-for each, participants who received the corresponding module had significantly larger decreases in the candidate mechanism than those who did not receive the module.
Sensory sensitivity and fear of aversive consequences improved more if the CBT-AR module was received, but lack of interest/low appetite may improve regardless of receipt of the corresponding module. Future research is needed to test target engagement in CBT-AR with adaptive treatment designs, and to identify valid and sensitive measures of candidate mechanisms.
The mechanisms through which components of CBT-AR work have yet to be elucidated. We conducted an exploratory investigation to test if assignment (vs. not) to a CBT-AR module resulted in larger improvements in the corresponding prototypic ARFID motivation that the module intended to target. Measures of the sensory sensitivity and the fear of aversive consequences motivations improved more in those who received the corresponding treatment module, whereas the lack of interest/low appetite measure improved regardless of if the corresponding module was received.
针对回避/限制型食物摄入障碍(ARFID;CBT-AR)的认知行为疗法理论上针对三种典型动机(感觉敏感性、缺乏兴趣/低食欲、对不良后果的恐惧),并针对这三种动机提供模块化干预。作为一项探索性研究,我们:(1)评估候选机制的变化与 ARFID 严重程度变化的关系,以及(2)测试是否分配(与不分配相比)到一个模块是否会导致对应机制的更大改善。
男性和女性(N=42;10-55 岁)参加了 CBT-AR 的开放试验。
每个候选机制的评分下降与 ARFID 严重程度的下降呈中等到高度相关-感觉敏感性下降:-0.7(r=0.42,p=0.01);缺乏兴趣/低食欲下降:-0.3(r=0.60,p<0.0001);和对不良后果的恐惧下降:-1.1(r=0.33,p=0.05)。线性混合模型显示,整个样本中每个候选机制每周都有显著的改善(p<0.0001)。对于感觉和对不良后果的恐惧模块,都存在显著的交互作用-对于每个模块,接受相应模块的参与者在候选机制方面的下降幅度明显大于未接受该模块的参与者。
如果接受 CBT-AR 模块,感觉敏感性和对不良后果的恐惧会得到更大改善,但缺乏兴趣/低食欲可能会改善,而无论是否接受相应的模块。未来的研究需要使用适应性治疗设计来测试 CBT-AR 的目标参与情况,并确定候选机制的有效和敏感的测量方法。
CBT-AR 各组成部分的作用机制尚不清楚。我们进行了一项探索性研究,以测试是否分配(与不分配相比)到 CBT-AR 模块会导致相应的 ARFID 动机(该模块旨在针对的动机)得到更大的改善。感觉敏感性和对不良后果的恐惧动机的测量在接受相应治疗模块的患者中改善更大,而缺乏兴趣/低食欲的测量则无论是否接受相应模块都有改善。