BackgroundIn this multi-centre randomized controlled trial (RCT) we compared modified mentalisation-based treatment (MBT-ED) to specialist supportive clinical management (SSCM-ED) in patients with eating disorders (EDs) and borderline personality disorder symptoms (BPD). This group of patients presents complex challenges to clinical services, and a treatment which addresses their multiple problems has the potential to improve outcome. MBT has been shown to be effective in improving outcome in patients with BPD, but its use has not been reported in ED.MethodsSixty-eight eligible participants were randomised to MBT-ED or SSCM-ED. The primary outcome measure was the global score on the Eating Disorder Examination. Secondary outcomes included measures of BPD symptoms (the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder), general psychiatric state, quality of life and service utilisation. Participants were assessed at baseline and at 6, 12 and 18 months after randomisation. Analysis was performed using linear mixed models.ResultsOnly 15 participants (22 %) completed the 18 month follow-up. Early drop-out occurred significantly more in the SSCM-ED group. Drop-out did not vary with treatment model later in therapy and was sometimes attributed to participants moving away. There was higher drop--out amongst smokers and those with higher neuroticism scores. 47.1 % of participants in the MBT-ED arm and 37.1 % in the SSCM-ED arm attended at least 50 % of therapy sessions offered.Amongst those remaining in the trial, at 12 and 18 months MBT-ED was associated with a greater reduction in Shape Concern and Weight Concern in the Eating Disorder Examination compared to SSCM-ED. At 6, 12 and 18 months there was a decline of ED and BPD symptoms in both groups combined.Ten participants were reported as having had adverse events during the trial, mostly self-harm, and there was one death, attributed as ’unexplained’ by the coroner.ConclusionsThe high drop-out rate made interpretation of the results difficult. Greater involvement of research staff in clinical management might have improved compliance with both therapy and research assessment. MBT-ED may have had an impact on core body image psychopathology.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials: ISRCTN51304415. Registered on 19 April 2011.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1606-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Mentalizing, the mental capacity to understand oneself and others in terms of mental states, has been found to be reduced in some mental disorders such as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). Some studies have suggested that Eating Disorders (EDs) may also be associated with impairments in mentalizing, but studies have not always yielded consistent results. This is the first study to systematically investigate mentalizing impairments in patients with Bulimia Nervosa (BN) compared with controls. In addition, we investigated whether impairments in mentalizing were related to BPD features, rather than BN per se, given the high comorbidity between BPD and BN. Methods Patients with BN ( n = 53) and healthy controls (HCs; n = 87) completed a battery of measures assessing mentalizing including the Reflective Function Questionnaires (RFQ), the Object Relations Inventory (ORI; Differentiation-Relatedness Scales) and the Reading The Mind in The Eyes Test (RMET). Results Patients with BN scored significantly lower than HCs on all tests of mentalizing, with moderate to large between-group effect sizes. These differences were partially accounted for by BPD features as assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (ZAN-BPD), and partially by bulimic symptoms measured with the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q). Conclusions Patients with BN have significantly lower levels of mentalizing as assessed with a broad range of tests compared to HCs. These differences were related to both bulimic symptoms and BPD features. Although further research in larger samples is needed, if replicated, these findings suggest that poor mentalizing may be a significant factor in BN patients and should be addressed in treatment, regardless of the presence of BPD features.

BackgroundThought-Shape Fusion (TSF) and Thought-Action Fusion (TAF) are cognitive distortions that are associated with eating and obsessional pathology respectively. Both involve the underlying belief that mere thoughts and mental images can lead to negative outcomes. TSF involves the belief that food-related thoughts lead to weight gain, body dissatisfaction, and perceptions of moral wrong-doing. TAF is more general, and involves the belief that merely thinking about a negative event (e.g., a loved one getting into a car accident) can make this event more likely to happen, and leads to perceptions of moral wrong-doing. However, the shared susceptibility across related cognitive distortions—TAF and TSF—has not yet been studied.MethodThe effects of TSF and TAF inductions in women with an eating disorder (n = 21) and a group of healthy control women with no history of an eating disorder (n = 23) were measured. A repeated-measures design was employed, with all participants exposed to a TSF, TAF and neutral induction during three separate experimental sessions. Participants’ cognitive and behavioral responses were assessed.ResultsIndividuals with eating disorders were more susceptible to TSF and TAF than were control participants, demonstrating more neutralization behavior after TSF and TAF inductions (i.e., actions to try to reduce the negative effects of the induction), and reporting higher levels of trait TAF and TSF than did controls.ConclusionsIndividuals with eating disorders are particularly susceptible to both TAF and TSF. Clinical implications of these findings will be discussed.

No abstract