Objective: Autistic people with eating disorders (EDs) may have special needs that are not met in standard ED treatment, raising the need for treatment adaptations to accommodate co-existing autism spectrum condition (ASC).Little is currently known about the nature of existing treatment options or adaptations for this population. We conducted a pre-registered systematic review to: (1) identify research articles describing existing interventions for patients with ED and comorbid ASC, and to critically review evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (Review 1); (2) review the impact of ASC comorbidity on ED clinical outcomes (Review 2). Method: Peer-reviewed studies published until the end of December 2020 were identified through a systematic search of the electronic databases: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus and Cochrane Library. Results: Only one clinical pathway of treatment adaptations (the 'PEACE' pathway) was identified in Review 1 with early evidence of cost-savings and favourable treatment outcomes. ASC characteristics were shown in Review 2 to have no direct impact on physical outcomes or ED symptoms, but could be associated with higher rates of comorbidities and greater use of intensive ED treatment. Additionally, patients with ASC characteristics may benefit more from individual sessions, rather than group sessions.Conclusions: Any new treatments or treatment adaptations may not directly impact on ED symptoms, but may be better able to support the complex needs of the ASC population, thus reducing subsequent need for intensive treatment. Future research is warranted to explore evidence of clinical and costeffectiveness of interventions for this population.

Background: Audit data is important in creating a clear picture of clinical reality in clinical services, and evaluating treatment outcomes. This paper explored the data from an audit of a large national eating disorder (ED) service and evaluated the outcome of inpatient and day treatment programmes for patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) with and without autistic traits.Methods: Four hundred and seventy-six patients receiving treatment for AN at inpatient (IP), day-care (DC) and step-up (SU) programmes were assessed at admission and at discharge on the following measures: autistic traits, body-mass-index (BMI), ED symptoms, depression and anxiety symptoms, work and social functioning, and motivation for change. Outcomes were analyzed first at a within-group level based on change in mean scores and then at an individual level based on the clinical significance of improvement in eating disorder symptoms. Outcomes were compared between patients with high autistic traits (HAT) and low autistic traits (LAT) in each programme.Results: The findings suggest that 45.5% of DC and 35.1% of IP patients showed clinically significant changes in ED symptoms following treatment. Co-occurring high autistic traits positively predicted improvement in ED symptoms in IP setting, but was a negative predictor in DC. In IP, more HAT inpatients no longer met the BMI cut-off for AN compared to LAT peers. In terms of general psychopathology, patients with AN and HAT exhibited more severe depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms and social functioning impairment than their LAT peers, and these symptoms stayed clinically severe after treatment.Conclusions: Patients with AN and hight autistic traits are more likely than their peers with low autistic traits to show weight restoration and improvement in ED systems after inpatient treatment. This reverses in DC, with high autistic trait patients less likely to improve after treatment compared to low autistic trait patients. Our results suggest that inpatient treatment with individualized and structured routine care may be an effective model of treatment for patients with AN and high autistic traits.

Objective: The current research aimed to compare clinical outcome measures of two National Eating Disorder (ED) Day Services at the Maudsley Hospital from before the COVID‐19 lockdown, when treatment was face to face, with after the lockdown when treatment moved online. Method: Clinical outcome measures collected as part of the admission and discharge process were compared from the beginning and end of treatment for patients treated either via face‐to‐face or online delivery. Twenty‐nine patients’ data were analyzed (89% of them female, 11% male, 89% from White ethnic backgrounds, 11% from BAME ethnic backgrounds and a mean age of 25.99 years). Additionally, the mean change in outcome measures was also compared between the two groups (pre‐lockdown face to face and during lockdown online). Results: Treatment delivered face to face led to significant improvements in body mass index (BMI) but not in Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDEQ) Global and Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) Total scores. In contrast, treatment delivered online led to significant improvements in EDEQ Global and WSAS Total scores but not in BMI. Neither one of the delivery modalities created significantly larger mean changes in any of the clinical outcome measures than the other. Conclusions: Both face‐to‐face and online delivery of eating disorder day treatment show some success. Suggested improvements for using online delivery of treatment include implementing additional support opportunities, adapting the online format to improve communication and commitment and using a hybrid model of specific face‐to‐face elements with some online treatment.

IntroductionPrevious research has explored the overlapping presentation between autism and eating disorders (ED). This study aims to summarize the clinical challenges associated with co-occurring autism and anorexia nervosa (AN) based on clinicians' case notes and minutes from case discussions, to understand how to better support people with the comorbidity.MethodThematic analysis was conducted on de-identified notes on 20 cases with AN and autistic characteristics and minutes from case discussions. Themes relevant to clinical challenges in supporting those with the comorbidity were identified, and a thematic map was produced to visually represent the results.ResultsThe key challenges faced by clinicians when treating patients with AN and autism included: communication difficulties, maintaining boundaries, autism screening, presence of other comorbidities, sensory difficulties, atypical presentation of eating difficulties, cognitive rigidity, and emotional difficulties. Adaptations to resolve some of these difficulties included exposure-based food experiments, keeping a record of patients' self-reported communication preferences, individual-level modification of communication style, and providing tools for patients to identify emotions.Conclusions and implicationsFurther exploration to establish the effectiveness of the adaptations is warranted. Furthermore, tools for differentiating between ED, autism and other comorbidities are needed to help clinicians clarify the cause of a presenting symptom, and help them to best support and maintain boundaries with patients.

No abstract