Comparison of face-to-face versus email guided self-help for binge eating: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Abstract

BackgroundGuided self-help is a recommended first-step treatment for bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder and atypical variants of these disorders. Further research is needed to compare guided self-help that is delivered face-to-face versus via email.Methods/DesignThis clinical trial uses a randomised, controlled design to investigate the effectiveness of providing guided self-help either face-to-face or via e-mail, also using a delayed treatment control condition. At least 17 individuals are required per group, giving a minimum N of 51.DiscussionSymptom outcomes will be assessed and estimates of cost-effectiveness made. Results are proposed to be disseminated locally and internationally (through submission to conferences and peer-reviewed journals), and will hopefully inform local service provision. The trial has been approved by an ethics review board and was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01832792 on 9 April 2013.

Clinical and cost‐effectiveness of two ways of delivering guided self‐help for people with an eating disorder: A multi‐arm randomized controlled trial

“…This study was a pragmatic, parallel, three‐arm randomized controlled trial, delivered in a routine clinical setting to provide a balance between internal and external validity. The study protocol has been published (Jenkins et al, 2014). Three conditions were evaluated in the treatment of recurrent, broadly‐defined binge eating (i.e., subjective and objective episodes): face‐to‐face GSH (fGSH); email‐based GSH (eGSH); and a waiting list comparison condition (WL).…”

“…Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to fGSH, eGSH, or WL. To maximize recruitment and efficiency of the trial (Kahan, 2016), participants allocated to the WL condition were offered randomization to one of the two treatment conditions after the 12 weeks had elapsed (see Jenkins et al, 2014). Sixty‐six participants entered active treatment immediately following initial randomization, and 54 were re‐randomized having completed a waiting period (thus participating in both the WL condition and one intervention).…”

“…In the current study, outcomes from face‐to‐face GSH and email‐delivered GSH were compared to those of a Waiting List control condition to examine whether these treatments are effective in naturalistic environments and, further, to investigate the differential effects of these interventions on several outcomes, including drop‐out, symptom outcomes, and cost‐effectiveness. As a secondary analysis (stated as an aim in the protocol; Jenkins, Luck, Burrows, & Boughton, 2014), the relative effectiveness of the two GSH treatments was explored.…”

Cost-of-illness for Non-underweight Eating Disorders

“…Demographic information is summarised in Table 1. Individuals with a diagnosis of bulimia nervosa (BN), binge-eating disorder (BED), or OSFED participated in a randomised controlled trial of CBT-based guided self-help with few exclusion criteria (see [25]). Conduct of the trial was approved by an ethics review board and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01832792) and ndings are reported in Jenkins et al [26].…”

“…A questionnaire was designed for the purposes of this study, completed retrospectively by participants (see [25]). Although self-report methods of estimating economic impact can be challenging, it is recommended that they consider: a recall time frame of 6 months or less; resource utilisation frequency; and type of utilisation [27].…”