Individual psychological therapy in the outpatient treatment of adults with anorexia nervosa

Background Anorexia nervosa is a disorder with high morbidity and significant mortality. It is most common in young adult women, in whom the incidence may be increasing. The focus of treatment has moved to an outpatient setting, and a number of differing psychological therapies are presently used in treatment. This is an update of a Cochrane review which was last published in 2008. Objectives To assess the effects of specific individual psychological therapies for anorexia nervosa in adults or older adolescents treated in an outpatient setting. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) (16 July 2014). This register includes relevant randomised controlled trials from: the Cochrane Library (all years), MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), and PsycINFO (1967 to date). We screened reference lists of all included studies and sent letters to identified, notable researchers requesting information on unpublished or ongoing studies. Selection criteria All randomised controlled trials of one or more individual outpatient psychological therapies for adults with anorexia nervosa, as defined by DSM‐5 or similar international criteria. Data collection and analysis We selected a range of outcome variables, including physical state, severity of eating disorder attitudes and beliefs, interpersonal function, and general psychiatric symptom severity. Continuous outcome data comparisons used the mean or standardised mean difference (MD or SMD), and binary outcome comparisons used the risk ratio (RR). Two review authors (PH and AC or ST) extracted data independently. Main results We identified 10 trials from the search, with a total of 599 anorexia nervosa participants, and included them in the review. Seven had been identified in the previous versions of this review and we now include three new trials. We now deem one previously identified ongoing trial to be ineligible, and six ongoing trials are new for this update. Two of the 10 trials included children. Trials tested diverse psychological therapies and comparability was poor. Risks of bias were mostly evident through lack of blinded outcome assessments (in 60% of studies) and incomplete data reporting (attrition bias). The results suggest that treatment as usual (TAU) when delivered by a non‐eating‐disorder specialist or similar may be less efficacious than focal psychodynamic therapy. This was suggested for a primary outcome of recovery