Objective We aimed to characterize the current and lifetime prevalence of comorbid psychiatric diagnoses and suicidality in treatment‐ and nontreatment‐seeking individuals with full and subthreshold avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID). We also sought to examine unique associations between the three DSM‐5 ARFID profiles (i.e., sensory sensitivity, fear of aversive consequences, and lack of interest in food or eating) and specific categories of psychiatric diagnoses and suicidality. Method We conducted structured clinical interviews with 74 children and adolescents with full or sub threshold ARFID to assess the presence of comorbid psychiatric diagnoses, suicidality, and the severity of each of the three ARFID profiles. Results Nearly half of the sample (45%) met criteria for a current comorbid psychiatric diagnosis, and over half (53%) met criteria for a lifetime comorbid diagnosis. A total of 8% endorsed current suicidality and 14% endorsed lifetime suicidality. Severity in the sensory sensitivity profile was uniquely associated with greater odds of comorbid disorders in the neurodevelopmental, disruptive, and conduct disorders category; the anxiety, obsessive–compulsive, and trauma‐related disorders category; and the depressive and bipolar‐related disorders category. Severity in the fear of aversive consequences profile was associated with greater odds of disorders in the anxiety, obsessive–compulsive, and trauma‐related disorders category. Discussion Our findings underscore the severity of psychopathology among individuals with ARFID and related presentations, and also highlight the potential that shared psychopathology between specific ARFID profiles and other psychiatric disorders represent transdiagnostic constructs (e.g., avoidant behavior) that may be relevant treatment targets.
Objective: The Nine Item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) Screen (NIAS) has three subscales aligned with ARFID presentations but clinically validated cutoff scores have not been identified. We aimed to examine NIAS subscale (picky eating, appetite, fear) validity to: (1) capture clinically-diagnosed ARFID presentations; (2) differentiate ARFID from other eating disorders (other-ED); and (3) capture ARFID symptoms among individuals with ARFID, individuals with other-ED, and nonclinical participants. Method: Participants included outpatients (ages 10-76 years; 75% female) diagnosed with ARFID (n = 49) or other-ED (n = 77), and nonclinical participants (ages 22-68 years; 38% female, n = 40). We evaluated criterion-related concurrent validity by conducting receiver operating curve (ROC) analyses to identify potential subscale cutoffs and by testing if cutoffs could capture ARFID with and without use of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q).Results: Each NIAS subscale had high AUC for capturing those who fit versus do not fit each ARFID presentation, resulting in proposed cutoffs of ≥10 (sensitivity = .97, specificity = .63), ≥9 (sensitivity = .86, specificity = .70), and ≥ 10 (sensitivity = .68, specificity = .89) on the NIAS-picky eating, NIAS-appetite, and NIAS-fear subscales, respectively. ARFID versus other-ED had high AUC on the NIAS-picky eating (≥10 proposed cutoff), but not NIAS-appetite or NIAS-fear subscales. NIAS subscale cutoffs had a high association with ARFID diagnosis, but only correctly classified other-ED in combination with EDE-Q Global <2.3. Discussion: To screen for ARFID, we recommend using a screening tool for other-ED
There are currently no evidence-based treatments for adults with avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and proof-of-concept of cognitive-behavioral therapy for ARFID (CBT-AR) for adults. Males and females (ages 18–55 years) were offered 20–30 outpatient sessions of CBT-AR delivered by one of five therapists. Of 18 eligible adults offered CBT-AR, 15 chose to participate and 14 completed treatment. All patients endorsed high ratings of treatment credibility and expected improvement after the first session, and 93% of completers provided high ratings of satisfaction at the conclusion of treatment. Therapists rated the majority (80%) of patients as “much improved” or “very much improved.” Based on intent-to-treat analyses, ARFID severity on the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview (PARDI) showed a large and significant decrease from pre- to post-treatment; and patients incorporated a mean of 18.0 novel foods. The underweight subgroup ( n = 4) gained an average of 11.38 pounds, showing a large and significant increase in mean BMI from the underweight to the normal-weight range. At post-treatment, 47% of patients no longer met criteria for ARFID. To our knowledge, this is the first prospective treatment study of ARFID in adults. The findings of this study provide preliminary evidence of feasibility, acceptability, and proof-of-concept of CBT-AR for heterogeneous presentations of ARFID in adults. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02963220 .
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.