Article

An examination of the Clinical Impairment Assessment among women at high risk for eating disorder onset

Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Bethesda, MD 20815, USA.
Behaviour Research and Therapy (Impact Factor: 3.85). 03/2012; 50(6):407-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2012.02.009
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Identifying measures that reliably and validly assess clinical impairment has important implications for eating disorder (ED) diagnosis and treatment. The current study examined the psychometric properties of the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA) in women at high risk for ED onset. Participants were 543 women (20.6 ± 2.0 years) who were classified into one of three ED categories: clinical ED, high risk for ED onset, and low risk control. Among high risk women, the CIA demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.93) and good convergent validity with disordered eating attitudes (rs = 0.27-0.68, ps < 0.001). Examination of the CIA's discriminant validity revealed that CIA global scores were highest among women with a clinical ED (17.7 ± 10.7) followed by high risk women (10.6 ± 8.5) and low risk controls (3.0 ± 3.3), respectively (p < 0.001). High risk women reporting behavioral indices of ED psychopathology (objective and/or subjective binge episodes, purging behaviors, driven exercise, and ED treatment history) had higher CIA global scores than those without such indices (ps < 0.05), suggesting good criterion validity. These data establish the first norms for the CIA in a United States sample. The CIA is psychometrically sound among high risk women, and heightened levels of impairment among these individuals as compared to low risk women verify the relevance of early intervention efforts.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
92 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A number of studies have provided data on young women for the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA, v. 3.0), a measure of psychosocial impairment in eating disorders. However, little data exists on eating disorder samples. The aim of the current study was to investigate psychometric properties of the CIA in a clinical sample, using confirmatory factor analysis based on the originally-proposed model. The CIA was administered alongside with the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE) to 190 individuals referred to an eating disorder service. Psychometric properties of the CIA were acceptable, based on model fit and factor loadings. The CIA appears to be a useful and valid measure for the assessment of impairment in eating disorders.
    Eating behaviors 04/2013; 14(2):241-3. DOI:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2012.12.001
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Assessing clinically meaningful change is valuable for treatment planning, monitoring course of illness and evaluating outcome. Although DSM eating disorder (ED) diagnoses have been criticized for poor clinical utility, instability, and uncertainty, remission/change of diagnosis is often the standard for evaluating outcome. We tested the validity of the clinically significant reliable change index (CS/RCI) compared to change in DSM-IV ED-diagnoses. We investigated if CS/RCI was concordant to diagnostic change and compared explained variance on measures at follow-up. Using a database for specialized ED treatment in Sweden the sample contained 1042 female patients (246 adolescents/796 adults). CS/RCI was calculated for the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA) and the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q). CS/RCI explained more variance in gain scores for psychopathology measures than diagnostic change (DSM-IV). Average agreement between diagnostic change and CS/RCI were 62% and 60% for CIA and EDE-Q, respectively. Diagnostic change always resulted in more positive outcome than CS/RCI. Together with clinical judgment, CS/RCI is a valuable method for determining clinically significant changes in clinical practice and research. It is economically sound and results are easily interpreted and communicated to patients.
    05/2014; 216(2). DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.02.008
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BackgroundDSM-IV eating disorder (ED) diagnoses have been criticized for lack of clinical utility, diagnostic instability, and over-inclusiveness of the residual category “ED not otherwise specified” (EDNOS). Revisions made in DSM-5 attempt to generate a more scientifically valid and clinically relevant system of ED classification. The aim with the present study was to examine clinical characteristics and distinctiveness of the new DSM-5 ED diagnoses, especially concerning purging disorder (PD). MethodsUsing a large naturalistic Swedish ED database, 2233 adult women were diagnosed using DSM-5. Initial and 1-year follow-up psychopathology data were analyzed. Measures included the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire, Structural Eating Disorder Interview, Clinical Impairment Assessment, Structural Analysis of Social Behavior, Comprehensive Psychiatric Rating Scale, and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders.ResultsFew meaningful differences emerged between anorexia nervosa binge/purge subtype (ANB/P), PD, and bulimia nervosa (BN). Unspecified Feeding and Eating Disorders (UFED) showed significantly less severity compared to other groups.ConclusionsPD does not appear to constitute a distinct diagnosis, the distinction between atypical AN and PD requires clarification, and minimum inclusion criteria for UFED are needed. Further sub-classification is unlikely to improve clinical utility. Instead, better delineation of commonalities is important.
    Journal of Eating Disorders 07/2013; 1. DOI:10.1186/2050-2974-1-31

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
19 Downloads
Available from
Jun 2, 2014