ObjectivesInvestigating for the first time in Germany Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Fifth Edition (DSM-5) prevalences of adolescent full syndrome, Other Specified Feeding or Eating Disorder (OSFED), partial and subthreshold anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN) and binge eating disorder (BED).MethodA national school-based cross-sectional survey with nine schools in Germany was undertaken that was aimed at students from grades 7 and 8. Of the 1775 students who were contacted to participate in the study, 1654 participated (participation rate: 93.2%). The sample consisted of 873 female and 781 male adolescents (mean age=13.4 years). Prevalence rates were established using direct symptom criteria with a structured inventory (SIAB-S) and an additional self-report questionnaire (Eating Disorder Inventory 2 (EDI-2)).ResultsPrevalences for full syndrome were 0.3% for AN, 0.4% for BN, 0.5% for BED and 3.6% for OSFED-atypical AN, 0% for BN (low frequency/limited duration), 0% for BED (low frequency/limited duration) and 1.9% for purging disorder (PD). Prevalences of partial syndrome were 10.9% for AN (7.1% established with cognitive symptoms only, excluding weight criteria), 0.2% for BN and 2.1% for BED, and of subthreshold syndrome were 0.8% for AN, 0.3% for BN and 0.2% for BED. Cases on EDI-2 scales were much more pronounced with 12.6–21.1% of the participants with significant sex differences.ConclusionsThe findings were in accordance with corresponding international studies but were in contrast to other German studies showing much higher prevalence rates. The study provides, for the first time, estimates for DSM-5 prevalences of eating disorders in adolescents for Germany, and evidence in favour of using valid measures for improving prevalence estimates.Trial registration numberDRKS00005050; Results.

We provide an in-depth overview of changes resulting from the revisions of DSM eating disorder criteria in a German adolescent sample. Despite the overall increase in prevalence estimates, the results suggest that the DSM-5 criteria differentiate participants with threshold disorders and OSFED from those no diagnosis as well as or even more distinctly than the DSM-IV criteria.

No abstract

Objective: Given the severity of eating disorders, effective and easily implementable prevention programs which reduce incidence rates and in addition have health-economic benefits are essential. The majority of research on prevention programs focuses on questionnaire-based efficacy or the reduction of eating disorder symptoms while neglecting the health-economic perspective. By contrast, the present study focuses on both an efficacy analysis considering diagnostic criteria (DSM-5) and on evaluating the costbenefit of a universal prevention program for eating disorders ("MaiStep"). Method: A three-arm randomized controlled trial with baseline, posttreatment and 12-month follow-up was conducted with 1,654 adolescents (M = 13.35, SD = 0.76), comprising two intervention groups (MaiStep delivered by psychologists or teachers, IG-T) and an active control group (ACG). The primary outcome was DSM-5 eating disorder diagnosis measured with the SIAB-S. Furthermore, the costs of the prevention program and the savings in health care costs were calculated.Results: A significant difference in eating disorder diagnosis was found between the IG-T and the ACG for posttreatment (χ 2 (1= 7.352, p = .007), Relative Risk (RR) = .53 and 12month follow-up (χ 2 (1= 5.203, p = .023), RR = .61. MaiStep proved to be cost-effective (t cbr = 6.75), saving about 560,000 € (standardized per 1,000 students = 601,388.19 €).Discussion: Universal prevention can both reduce incidence rates of eating disorders and be cost-beneficial for health care systems. Future research should analyze prevention programs regarding efficacy and cost-benefit to enable comparability and derive guidelines for political decision-makers. Trial registration number:MaiStep is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00005050).