ObjectiveTo optimize treatment recommendations for eating disorders, it is important to investigate whether some individuals may benefit more (or less) from certain treatments. The current study... Show moreObjectiveTo optimize treatment recommendations for eating disorders, it is important to investigate whether some individuals may benefit more (or less) from certain treatments. The current study explored predictors and moderators of an automated online self-help intervention “Featback” and online support from a recovered expert patient.MethodsData were used from a randomized controlled trial. For a period of 8 weeks, participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomized to four conditions: (1) Featback, (2) chat or e-mail support from an expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support, and (4) a waitlist. A mixed-effects partitioning method was used to see if age, educational level, BMI, motivation to change, treatment history, duration of eating disorder, number of binge eating episodes in the past month, eating disorder pathology, self-efficacy, anxiety and depression, social support, or self-esteem predicted or moderated intervention outcomes in terms of eating disorder symptoms (primary outcome), and symptoms of anxiety and depression (secondary outcome).ResultsHigher baseline social support predicted less eating disorder symptoms 8 weeks later, regardless of condition. No variables emerged as moderator for eating disorder symptoms. Participants in the three active conditions who had not received previous eating disorder treatment, experienced larger reductions in anxiety and depression symptoms.DiscussionThe investigated online low-threshold interventions were especially beneficial for treatment-naïve individuals, but only in terms of secondary outcomes, making them well-suited for early intervention. The study results also highlight the importance of a supportive environment for individuals with eating disorder symptoms.Public SignificanceTo optimize treatment recommendations it is important to investigate what works for whom. For an internet-based intervention for eating disorders developed in the Netherlands, individuals who had never received eating disorder treatment seemed to benefit more from the intervention than those who had received eating disorder treatment, because they experienced larger reductions in symptoms of depression and anxiety. Stronger feelings of social support were related to less eating disorder symptoms in the future. Show less
Rohrbach, P.J.; Dingemans, A.E.; Spinhoven, P.; Ginkel, J.R. van; Fokkema, M.; Wilderjans, T.F.; ... ; Furth, E.F. van 2022
Objective: Many individuals with an eating disorder do not receive appropriate care. Low-threshold interventions could help bridge this treatment gap. The study aim was to evaluate the... Show moreObjective: Many individuals with an eating disorder do not receive appropriate care. Low-threshold interventions could help bridge this treatment gap. The study aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of Featback, a fully automated online self-help intervention, online expert-patient support and their combination. Method: A randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up period was conducted. Participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomized to four conditions: (1) Featback, a fully automated online self-help intervention, (2) chat or email support from a recovered expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support and (4) a waiting list control condition. The intervention period was 8 weeks and there was a total of six online assessments. The main outcome constituted reduction of eating disorder symptoms over time. Results: Three hundred fifty five participants, of whom 43% had never received eating disorder treatment, were randomized. The three active interventions were superior to a waitlist in reducing eating disorder symptoms (d = -0.38), with no significant difference in effectiveness between the three interventions. Participants in conditions with expert-patient support were more satisfied with the intervention. Discussion: Internet-based self-help, expert-patient support and their combination were effective in reducing eating disorder symptoms compared to a waiting list control condition. Guidance improved satisfaction with the internet intervention but not its effectiveness. Low-threshold interventions such as Featback and expert-patient support can reduce eating disorder symptoms and reach the large group of underserved individuals, complementing existing forms of eating disorder treatment. Public significance statement: Individuals with eating-related problems who received (1) a fully automated internet-based intervention, (2) chat and e-mail support by a recovered individual or (3) their combination, experienced stronger reductions in eating disorder symptoms than those who received (4) usual care. Such brief and easy-access interventions play an important role in reaching individuals who are currently not reached by other forms of treatment. Show less
Objective The primary aim was assessing the cost-effectiveness of an internet-based self-help program, expert-patient support, and the combination of both compared to a care-as-usual condition.... Show moreObjective The primary aim was assessing the cost-effectiveness of an internet-based self-help program, expert-patient support, and the combination of both compared to a care-as-usual condition. Method :An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial. Participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomly assigned to four conditions: (1) Featback, an online unguided self-help program, (2) chat or e-mail support from a recovered expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support, and (4) care-as-usual. After a baseline assessment and intervention period of 8 weeks, five online assessments were conducted over 12 months of follow-up. The main result constituted cost-utility acceptability curves with quality-of-life adjusted life years (QALYs) and societal costs over the entire study duration. Results: No significant differences between the conditions were found regarding QALYs, health care costs and societal costs. Nonsignificant differences in QALYs were in favor of the Featback conditions and the lowest societal costs per participant were observed in the Featback only condition (euro16,741) while the highest costs were seen in the care-as-usual condition (euro28,479). The Featback only condition had the highest probability of being efficient compared to the alternatives for all acceptable willingness-to-pay values. Discussion: Featback, an internet-based unguided self-help intervention, was likely to be efficient compared to Featback with guidance from an expert patient, guidance alone and a care-as-usual condition. Results suggest that scalable interventions such as Featback may reduce health care costs and help individuals with eating disorders that are currently not reached by other forms of treatment. Public significance statement: Internet-based interventions for eating disorders might reach individuals in society who currently do not receive appropriate treatment at low costs. Featback, an online automated self-help program for eating disorders, was found to improve quality of life slightly while reducing costs for society, compared to a do-nothing approach. Consequently, implementing internet-based interventions such as Featback likely benefits both individuals suffering from an eating disorder and society as a whole. Show less
Jongen, P.J.; Veen, G. ter; Lemmens, W.; Donders, R.; Noort, E. van; Zeinstra, E. 2020
Background: Empowerment helps persons with a chronic disease to self-manage their condition and increase their autonomy and participation. MSmonitor (Curavista by) is an interactive Web-based... Show moreBackground: Empowerment helps persons with a chronic disease to self-manage their condition and increase their autonomy and participation. MSmonitor (Curavista by) is an interactive Web-based program for self-management and multidisciplinary care in multiple sclerosis (MS). It includes, among others, short questionnaires on fatigue (Modified Fatigue Impact Scale-5 [MFIS-5]) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL, Leeds Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life [LMSQoL]); long questionnaires on disabilities, perception of disabilities (Multiple Sclerosis Impact Profile), and HRQoL (Multiple Sclerosis Quality of Life-54); a Medication and Adherence Inventory and an Activity Diary. The combination MFIS-5, LMSQoL, and Medication and Adherence Inventory constitutes the Quick Scan.Objective: This study aimed to investigate the short-term effects of MSmonitor on empowerment in patients with MS.Methods: We conducted a quasi-experimental study in a general hospital. Of the 180 patients with MS, 125 were eligible, 30 used MSmonitor, and 21 participated in the study (mean age 45.4 years, SD 10.2 years). A total of 24 eligible patients who did not use MSmonitor constituted the control group (mean age 49.3 years, SD 11.4 years). At baseline and at 4 months, we assessed self-efficacy (Multiple Sclerosis Self-Efficacy Scale [MSSES]), participation and autonomy (Impact on Participation and Autonomy [IPA] questionnaire), and self-management (Partners In Health [PIH] questionnaire) Differences between time points and groups were tested with paired t tests and chi(2) tests.Results: In the MSmonitor group, follow-up values remained unchanged for MSSES control (P=.19), MSSES function (P=.62), IPA limitations (P=.26), IPA problems (P=.40), NH recognition and management of symptoms (P=.52), PIH adherence to treatment (P=.80), and PIH coping (P=.73), whereas the PIH knowledge score had improved (mean 27.8, SD 1.7 vs mean 28.7, SD 2.0; P=.02). The overall utilization rate of the program components was 83% and that of the Quick Scan was 95%. In the control group, all outcomes had remained unchanged.Conclusions: The results suggest that for first-time users of the MSmonitor program and their health care providers, it may not be justified to expect a short-term improvement in empowerment in terms of self-efficacy, self-management, autonomy, or participation. Furthermore, a lack of effect on empowerment is not because of nonusage of the program components. Show less
